Backwoods Utopias: The Sectarian Origins and the Owenite Phase of Communitarian Socialism in America, 1663-1829 9781512809640

Citation preview

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS T H E SECTARIAN ORIGINS AND T H E O W E N I T E PHASE OF COMMUNITARIAN SOCIALISM IN AMERICA: 1663-1829

THE ALBERT J . BEVERIDGE MEMORIAL FELLOWSHIP OF THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION FOR 1 9 4 6 WAS AWARDED TO THE AUTHOR FOR THE REVISION AND COMPLETION OF THIS WORK FOR THEIR ZEAL AND BENEFICENCE IN CREATING THIS FUND THE ASSOCIATION IS INDEBTED TO MANY CITIZENS OF INDIANA WHO DESIRED TO HONOR IN THIS WAY THE MEMORY OF A STATESMAN AND A HISTORIAN

AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS T H E SECTARIAN ORIGINS AND T H E OWENITE PHASE OF COMMUNITARIAN SOCIALISM IN AMERICA: 1663-1829

By

A R T H U R BESTOR SECOND ENLARGED E D I T I O N

ÜB Philadelphia UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS

Copyright © 1950 by the American Historical Association Copyright © 1953, 1957, by A r t h u r Bestor Copyright © 1970 by the T r u s t e e s of the University of Pennsylvania Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 76-92852 T h e first edition was published as: Backwoods Utopias: The Sectarian and Owenite Phases of Communitarian Socialism in America, 1663-1829

First p r i n t i n g 1950 Second p r i n t i n g 1959 T h i r d p r i n t i n g 1967

SECOND EDITION,

First Pennsylvania

Paperback

1970

edition published 1971

ISBN (paperback edition) : 8122-1004-2 ISBN (clothbound edition) : 8122-7193-9 Manutactured in the United States of America

T o the memory of MY FATHER, who studied history ere he made it.

PREFACE socialism is an unfamiliar name for a familiar pattern of ideas. What that pattern is, the opening chapter of this book attempts to make clear. But the terminology used to describe it requires, perhaps, some prefatory explanation. T h e two words that writers have commonly applied to the experimental, co-operative communities here discussed are Utopian and communistic. Though each term is appropriate enough in certain connections, neither is precise and objective enough for the purposes of historical description and intellectual analysis. According to the definitions employed by such students of the sociology of knowledge as Karl Mannheim, all socialist systems are Utopian in that they draw their ideals not from the realm of what is, but from the realm of what might be, and they use these ideals to "inspire collective activity which aims to change . . . reality to conform with their goals." 1 It is in this sense that the word utopias is employed in the title of this book. T h e use of the term Utopian to discriminate between different schemes of social reform, however, has no more exalted origin than party polemics. Ever since the Communist Manifesto of 1848, Marxists have condescended to their "utopian" predecessors and arrogated to themselves the term "scientific socialism." T o import such an obviously tendencious classification into a work of history is to prejudge every question which it is the scholar's duty to deal with critically. For quite different reasons, the term communistic must be rejected as misleading. T h a t it has meant different things at different times and places is obvious to all, but few have recognized the magnitude and complexity of the changes in signification that have occurred since the word communism was coined in 1840. T o begin with, it has actually denoted two quite different things—a system in which property is held in common, and a system in which reform is attempted through small communities. Reference books have ordinarily been guided by the first concept in their definitions and by the second in their examples. It is only in the second sense, of course, that most of the experiments described in the present work can be characterized as communistic, for only a minority were based on complete community of property. Communism, moreover, has possessed connotations diametrically opposed to each other. In the last COMMUNITARIAN

i Karl Mannheim, "Utopia," Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences (15 vols.. New York, 1929-35), XV, 201. vii

viii

PREFACE

thirty years, of course, it has connoted a philosophy more militant and revolutionary than other systems of social reform. There was a time, however, when socialism was contrasted with it as being "far more imperious and widesweeping than communism," far more concerned with "revolutionizing society." 2 Face to face with such deepseated ambiguities of meaning, the scholar has little choice but to seek another word. Fortunately he does not need to go outside the group of terms that were current in the early days of the socialist movement. T h e very year 1840 that saw the birth of the word communism saw also the creation of the terms communitarian and communitarianism, which were joined two years later by the useful variant communitive. These words derived immediately from community, and they soon came to signify primarily a system of social reform based on small communities. A clear-cut distinction in meaning from communistic, in the sense of holding property in common, was never completely established, because of the limited currency of these differentiated terms. But they enjoyed high literary sanction in the writings of Hawthorne, and they find their places today in the larger dictionaries. No better answer can be found to the problem of terminology which the present study poses than to revive these half-forgotten, and hence uncontroversial, terms and to endow them deliberately with the sharply discriminated meaning that earlier usage had begun to accept. T h e author's research in the history of communitarian socialism began with a study of the Fourierist movement of the 1840's. T h e first results were embodied in a doctoral dissertation presented at Yale, which was awarded the John Addison Porter Prize in 1938. This manuscript was allowed to remain unpublished, pending a more adequate study of the origins and earlier manifestations of communitarianism. T h e present volume is the outcome of that additional study. It carries the narrative, however, only to the end of the Owenite period. T h e original study of Fourierism will be comprised in a subsequent work dealing with the communitarian movement of the 1840's and 1850's in its various aspects. For financial assistance in the research and preparation of the present volume, I am indebted to the Committee on the Albert J. Beveridge Memorial Fund of the American Historical Association, which awarded me the Albert J. Beveridge Memorial Fellowship in 1946 on the basis of the uncompleted draft; to the Newberry Library, which granted me a Newberry Fellowship for research in 1946; and 2 Theodore D. Woolsey, Communism and Socialism in Their History and Theory: A Sketch (New York, 1880), p. 9. For a detailed study of usage see the present writer's article, " T h e Evolution of the Socialist Vocabulary," Journal of the History of Ideas, IX, 259-302 (June 1948).

PREFACE

ix

to the Research Committee of Stanford University and the University Research Board of the University of Illinois, which provided aid through several grants. Under the last-mentioned of these I have enjoyed the able assistance of Mr. Claude E. Fike, Jr., Mr. Philip I. Mitterling, and Mr. Pinckney Miller Mayfield during the final revision of the work. Specific acknowledgment is made in the footnotes and bibliography to libraries and individuals who gave permission to use unpublished materials in their collections. I cannot hope to repay, by a mere acknowledgment, the invaluable assistance and the innumerable kindnesses I have received from the staffs of the libraries in which I have worked: those, first of all, belonging to the universities with which I have been connected, Yale, Columbia, Stanford, Wisconsin, and Illinois, and those also whose collections I have consulted over extended periods of time, Harvard, the Library of Congress, the public libraries of New York and Boston, the Newberry Library, the Henry E. Huntington Library, the Indiana Historical Society, the Indiana State Library, the New Harmony Workingmen's Institute, the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the Chicago Historical Society. I am also indebted to the librarians and staffs of the Co-operative Union, Manchester, England, the British Museum, and the National Library of Wales for locating and reproducing documents in their collections. T h e Illinois Historical Survey, a department of the Graduate College of the University of Illinois, has generously co-operated by acquiring photostats and microfilm of many important bodies of manuscripts for my use. Over the years I have accumulated, in connection with this study, a multitude of personal obligations the enumeration of which is now hopeless. T o my teachers at Yale, particularly Professor Ralph H. Gabriel, who guided my original research, and to many faculty colleagues elsewhere, particularly Professor Merle Curti of Wisconsin, I am indebted for long and stimulating conversations on the questions with which I have attempted to deal, and, in many instances, for critical reading of portions of the manuscript. I am under obligation also to many correspondents who communicated valuable information, and to a number of men and women who permitted me to invade the privacy of their homes in quest of the material survivals of early communitarian life. The manuscript has been read in full by the members of the Committee on the Albert J. Beveridge Memorial Fund as constituted at the time of the Fellowship award; by Professor Robert E. Spiller of the University of Pennsylvania in his capacity as special consultant to this Committee during the completion of the manuscript; and

X

PREFACE

by Miss Livia Appel of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. T o them belongs the credit for many merits which will hereafter pass as my own, and for the absence of many faults which, save for them, would have hardened into type. I hasten to add, in the words of Job, "And be it indeed that I have erred, mine error remaineth with myself." University of Illinois A. B. August 1949 PREFACE T O T H E SECOND E D I T I O N T h e r e are many historical contexts within which communitarian socialism ought to be viewed. Several of these were examined in the first edition of Backwoods Utopias: the place of communitarianism in the spectrum of reform movements generally, its recurrent and multifold connections with religion, its ties with educational thought. During the decade following the publication of the original book, the writer had occasion to examine other relationships between the communitarian movement and the society wherein it enjoyed a modest flowering. T w o of the papers that resulted from these inquiries are reprinted in this new edition of the book. T h e first additional essay, "Patent-Office Models of the Good Society," attempts to define the precise relationship between communitarianism and that moving "frontier" which is so often invoked in causal explanations of American phenomena. T h e second paper, originally presented to an audience of European scholars, undertakes to distinguish the various forms of migration—whether of people, or of ideas, or of mere incitement to action—which constituted " T h e Transit of Communitarian Socialism to America." I n the last-mentioned essay various statistical generalizations are based on the "Checklist of Communitarian Experiments," printed on pages 273-285 below. After reviewing the evidence I am now of the opinion that one of the communities originally listed (Garden Grove, n u m b e r 101) never advanced beyond the stage of a mere project and was therefore erroneously included. T h e essay in question takes account of this altered conclusion (see its footnote 12). A n d in the "Checklist" itself (at pages 283, 284, and 285, below) the necessary corrections have been indicated. A few minor changes have been made in text and footnotes, and the bibliography has been brought down to date by means of brief supplements to the several parts of the Bibliographical Essay (see pages 288, 294, 300, and 310). University of Washington, August 1969

Seattle

^"

CONTENTS PREFACE I II III

VII

THE COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW HOLY COMMONWEALTHS:

1

T H E C O M M U N I T I V E SECTS

TRANSMITTING T H E COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION TO THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

IV V VI VII VIII

20

38

ROBERT OWEN'S NEW VIEW OF SOCIETY

60

T H E R E C E P T I O N O F O W E N I S M IN A M E R I C A

94

EDUCATIONAL ALLIES OF COMMUNITARIANISM

133

N E W H A R M O N Y . ' A S T U D Y IN D I S S O N A N C E

160

THE OWENITE LEGACY

202

S U P P L E M E N T A L ESSAYS: I

P A T E N T - O F F I C E MODELS OF T H E GOOD SOCIETY: SOME RELATIONSHIPS WESTWARD

II

THE

TRANSIT

BETWEEN

EXPANSION OF

SOCIAL

REFORM

AND

(1953)

COMMUNITARIAN

230 SOCIALISM

TO

A M E R I C A (1957) APPENDIX:

CHECKLIST

253 OF COMMUNITARIAN

M E N T S I N I T I A T E D IN T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S

EXPERIBEFORE

1860

273

B I B L I O G R A P H I C A L ESSAY (WITH ADDENDA, 1949-1969)

287

INDEX

311

T h e index does not include entries for the two supplemental essays or for the addenda to the Bibliographical Essay.

Chapter I T H E COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW THE American Republic, remarked the aging James Madison to an English visitor, is "useful in proving things before held impossible." 1 Of all the freedoms for which America stood, none was more significant for history than the freedom to experiment with new practices and new institutions. What remained mere speculation in the Old World had a way of becoming reality in the New. In this process, moreover, the future seemed often to unveil itself. T h e evolving institutions of the United States, wrote Lord Bryce, "are something more than an experiment, for they are believed to disclose and display the type of institutions towards which, as by a law of fate, the rest of civilized mankind are forced to move, some with swifter, others with slower, but all with unresting feet." 2 A conviction of this gave motive and meaning to the journey of many a traveler in earJy nineteenth-century America. Urged on by hope or by fear, each sought diligently the unique and the portentous in the social patterns of the new republic. Little wonder, then, that many visitors were struck with the cooperative and communistic colonies that dotted the northern and western states. Here the social dreams of the Old World were dreams no longer, but things of flesh and blood. Here the social problems of the nineteenth century were being confronted on the plane, not of theory, but of action. Here, perhaps, the answers would shortly be found. So at least it appeared to Harriet Martineau, into whose ubiquitous ear-trumpet Madison spoke the words with which this chapter begins. Her reputation as a writer on political economy, well established when she came to America in 1834, lent weight to the conclusions she drew from her observations of the Shakers and of the German sectarians at Economy, Pennsylvania: If such external provision, with a great amount of accumulated wealth besides, is the result of co-operation and community of property among an ignorant, conceited, inert society like this, what might not the same principles of association achieve among a more intelligent set of people, stimulated by education . . . ? 1 Harriet Martineau, Society in America 2 James Bryce, American Commonwealth

1

(3 vols., London, 1837), I, 1. (3d ed.. New York, 1893), I, 1.

2

BACKWOODS U T O P I A S

Whether any principle to this effect can be brought to bear upon any large class of society in the old world, is at present the most important dispute, perhaps, that is agitating society. It will never now rest till it has been made matter of experiment. 3

Miss Martineau was not the only visitor stirred to reflections like these. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote of the Shaker community at Niskeyuna, near Albany, New York. Charles Dickens concluded his American tour by visiting the Shakers at Mount Lebanon in the same state. Some years earlier Mrs. Trollope, mother o£ another English novelist, underwent considerable hardship to view Fanny Wright's community at Nashoba, Tennessee. T h e Swedish author Fredrika Bremer visited and revisited the North American Phalanx, a Fourierist enterprise in New Jersey, and journeyed also to the Shakers. T h e German Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach was a guest, first of Robert Owen at his New Harmony experiment in Indiana, and then of Father Rapp at Economy. Friedrich List, the economist, looked appraisingly upon the latter. At least two Spanish-speaking travelers thought the Shakers significant enough to merit detailed description. 4 T o such an international array it is hardly necessary to add the names of Americans, influential and numerous, who turned inquiring glances upon Brook Farm, the Shakers, and the other experimental colonies. One's first thought is that these observers were misguided. No unresting feet have hurried the American people into co-operative communities like these. No one at present would suggest that such experiments hold the clue to the future social structure of the world.5 In the past half-century or so, the small co-operative community has seemed backward- rather than forward-looking, a plan to stabilize life at a simpler level than that of contemporary society. Toynbee, in fact, discusses Utopias in general among the "Arrested Civilizations," 3 Martineau, Society in America, II, 57-58; see also I, x-xiv, xvii-xviii; II, 54-65. * Alexis de Tocqueville to his mother, Auburn [N.Y.], 17 juillet 1831, printed in his Oeuvres completes (9 vols., Paris, 1864-67), VII, 34-36; Charles Dickens, American Notes for General Circulation (Everyman's Library; London, 1907), pp. 211-15 (first published 1842); Mrs. Frances M. Trollope, Domestic Manners of the Americans (2 vols., London, 1832), I, 38-42, 194-96; Fredrika Bremer, Homes of the New World, translated by Mary Howitt (2 vols., New York, 1853), I, 75-85, 556-71; II, 573-80, 611-24; [Karl] Bernhard, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach,- Travels through North America, during the Years 1825 and 1826 (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1828), II, 106-23, 159-66; Margaret E. Hirst, Life of Friedrich List (London, 1909), pp. 3536; Watt Stewart, translator, "A Mexican and a Spaniard Observe the Shakers, 1830-1835," New York History, XXII, 67-76 (Jan. 1941). s The most that has recently been claimed for them is that they provide "the type of settlement that seems best suited to the pioneer task of breaking the ground for other types." Henrik F. Infield, Cooperative Communities at Work (New York, 1945), p. vii.

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

3

arguing that "the action which they are intended to evoke is nearly always the 'pegging', at a certain level, of an actual society which has entered on a decline." 6 With the example of recent experimental communities before them, historians have found it hard to treat the nineteenth-century enthusiasm for such enterprises as anything but escapism. Contemporaries did not so regard it. T h e advocates of experimental communities did not think they were stepping aside from the path of progress into an arcadian retreat. They presented themselves in all earnestness as guides and pathfinders to the future. And nineteenth-century observers were serious as they weighed such claims and sought, either with expectation or foreboding, to measure the potentialities of the movement. T o understand this movement aright, it is necessary not only to view it in contemporary terms, but also to define, more clearly than has usually been done, its essential characteristics. In achieving such a definition the present-day student is impeded by his understandable preoccupation with strictly economic questions. T h e experimental communities were concerned, of course, with such matters, but the solutions they offered ranged from the complete community of goods practised by the Shakers to the elaborate joint-stock organization of the Fourierist phalanxes, avowedly designed to safeguard every type of vested property interest. T h e various socialistic colonies of the early nineteenth century cannot possibly be subsumed under any definition phrased in purely economic terms. Contemporaries were better able than we to recognize the obvious. What these enterprises had in common was the idea of employing the small experimental community as a lever to exert upon society the force necessary to produce reform and change. T h e ends might differ, with economic, religious, ethical, and educational purposes mingled in varying proportions. But the means were uniform, consistent, and well defined. These enterprises constituted a communitarian movement because each made the community the heart of its plan. T h e significance of this approach to reform is not apparent at first glance, because the means which the communitarian proposed are in large measure outmoded today. In the half-century following the Napoleonic Wars, however, communitarianism offered a method of reform that was peculiarly relevant to existing conditions and that apparently avoided the difficulties and dangers inherent in alternative programs of social change. Communitarianism was, in fact, one among four such alternative « Arnold J . Toynbee, A Study of History, abridgement of vols. I-VI by D. C. Somervell (New York, 1946), p. 183.

4

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

programs. Today we are apt to think of but three. Individualism, now largely associated with conservative thinking, we can recognize as an authentic philosophy of reform in the hands of an Adam Smith or a Jefferson, and in the ringing words of Emerson's Phi Beta Kappa Address of 1837, " I f the single man plant himself indomitably on his instincts, and there abide, the huge world will come round to him." 7 Revolution, too, is a possible path to social change, as present to our experience as it was to the eighteenth or nineteenth century. In between we recognize, as a third alternative, the multitude of reform movements, best described as gradualistic, which employ collective action but aim at an amelioration of particular conditions, not a total reconstruction of society. Communitarianism does not correspond exactly to any of these. It is collectivistic not individualistic, it is resolutely opposed to revolution, and it is impatient with gradualism. Such a position may seem no more than an elaborate and self-defeating paradox. T o the communitarian it was not. T h e small, voluntary, experimental community was capable, he believed, of reconciling his apparently divergent aims: an immediate, root-and-branch reform, and a peaceable, nonrevolutionary accomplishment thereof. A microcosm of society, he felt, could undergo drastic change in complete harmony and order, and the great world outside could be relied on to imitate a successful experiment without coercion or conflict. Such a bare statement of the communitarian point of view requires amplification and illustration. T h e sources of the idea must be traced. T h e distinctions between the alternative programs must not be allowed to rest upon the arbitrary dictum of the historian but must be verified in the contemporary writings of communitarians and their opponents. T h e relevance of the idea to the time and place in which it achieved its temporary prominence must be studied. Such is the threefold purpose of the present chapter. For the first century and a half of its history in America, the communitarian point of view was peculiarly associated with religion. Its ultimate origin is to be found in the idea, so persistent in religious thinking, that believers constitute a separate and consecrated body set over against the sinful world—a Chosen People as the Hebrews phrased it, a City of God in the language of St. Augustine. When such a separation from the world is thought to afford not only a means to individual salvation but also an example of the life through which all men may be redeemed, then this religious concept approaches the communitarian ideal. It did so, for example, in St. i Ralph Waldo Emerson, Complete Works, ed. by Edward W. Emerson (Centenary Ed.; 12 vols., Boston, 1903-4), I, 115.

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

5

Benedict's view of the monastery as "a little State, which could serve as a model for the new Christian society." 8 T h e specific origin of the communitarian ideal, as it developed in America, is to be found in the religious ideology of the radical Protestant sects that arose in the Reformation. That great movement proceeded along lines which correspond to the four methods of secular social reform already analyzed and distinguished. An emphasis upon individualism in religion is perhaps the most enduring consequence of Protestantism. But the Reformation also betrayed revolutionary characteristics in the numerous uprisings and conflicts that marked its spread. And its method was essentially gradual in the remaking of such ecclesiastical structures as the Church of England. Fourthly, and for present purposes most significantly, it produced the religious sect, which, in Ernst Troeltsch's concise definition, is a "religious association or conventicle, which aims at realizing within its own circle, as far as possible, the ideal of love and holiness"; which seeks "to withdraw from all contact with the State, and with force and secular power, and in a voluntary union to realize the evangelical Law of God," thus creating "a society within Society." B Certain specifically religious doctrines lie behind and continually reinforce the belief of sectarians in the high mission to be performed by small, separate, purified bodies of believers. T h e importance they attach to conversion or regeneration is one element, for it emphasizes the sharpness of the break that must be made with the evils of this world. In the American sects that became fully communitarian the idea of conversion was carried over explicitly from the individual to society itself. " T h e work of regeneration and salvation," said the official manual of Shaker theology, "respecteth souls in a united capacity; for no individual can be regenerated nor saved in any other capacity than in a Church-relation, any more than a hand or foot can be born separate or distinct from the human body." 10 And the s Ursmer Berliere's interpretation, quoted in R. W. Chambers, Thomas More (London, 193G), pp. 138-39. » Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teachings of the Christian Churches, translated by Olive Wyon (2 vols., London, 1931), I, 363-67. Compare H. Richard Niebuhr's characterization of a sect as a body that accepts "the ethics of the New Testament not as a program to be forced upon civil society but rather as the constitution of a separate religious community." Article "Sects," Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, XIII, 626. [Benjamin Seth Youngs], The Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing; Containing a General Statement of All Things Pertaining to the Faith and Practice of the Church of God in This Latter Day. Published by Order of the Ministry, in Union with the Church (3d ed., Union Village, O., 1823), p. 464. Compare the statement of the Rappites: "A harmonious and united society of men may be said to be a Kingdom of God. Men are created for men. All devotees, who do not

6

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

founder of the Oneida Community, John Humphrey Noyes, recognized a close historical connection between revivalism and communitarianism. "Since the war of 1812-15," he wrote, "the line of socialistic excitements lies parallel with the line of religious Revivals. . . . T h e Revival periods were a little in advance of those of Socialism. . . . T h e Revivalists had for their great idea the regeneration of the soul. T h e great idea of the Socialists was the regeneration of society, which is the soul's environment. These ideas belong together, and are the complements of each other." 11 A vivid and literal belief in the second coming of Christ reinforced these communitarian tendencies among the sects. In a world of sin and darkness, the perfect social order might be impossible, but if the world is about to pass away, then the attempt to create such a society is assured of swift and complete consummation. More than that, the attempt is part of the preparation that believers must make, and make quickly, to be ready to welcome the risen Christ. T h e Rappites, for example, believed "that they had formed their Society under the special guidance of God, whose kingdom was near at hand, and that life in their Society, as they planned it, was the best preparation for this kingdom. From their life of brotherly harmony to the kingdom of Christ would be an easy transition." 12 In planning such a life, the communitarian sects turned naturally to the Scriptures. T h e Book of Acts provided a description of the society which they believed was enjoined upon them. " T h e Church," according to the Shakers, "is of one joint-interest, as the children of one family, enjoying equal rights and privileges in things spiritual and temporal, because they are influenced and led by one Spirit, and love is the only bond of their union: As it is written, 'All that believed were together, and had all things common—and were of one heart, and of one soul.' " 13 T h e concluding scriptural quotation —a combination of Acts 2:44 and 4:32—was the favorite text of the practise the social virtues, deceive themselves." Thoughts on the Destiny of Man, Particularly with Reference to the Present Times; by the Harmony Society in Indiana ([Harmonie, Ind.], 1824), p. 82. ii John Humphrey Noyes, History of American Socialisms (Philadelphia, 1870), pp. 24-26. i- John A. Bole, The Harmony Society: A Chapter in German American Culture History (M. D. Learned, ed., Americana Germanica, n.s., reprinted from German American Annals, II; Philadelphia, 1904 [copyright 1905]), p. 37. Most of the communitarian sects in America held chiliastic beliefs in some form. T h e official name of the Shakers, for example, was the Millennial Church, or United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing. The Perfectionists, who established the Oneida Community, taught that the second coming had occurred at the time of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. See J. H. Noyes, A Treatise on the Second Coming of Christ (Putney, Vt„ 1840). 13 Youngs, Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing (3d ed., 1823), pp. 397-98.

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

7

communitarians. In 1822, for example, the New York Society for Promoting Communities placed it on the title page of its Essay on Common Wealths, and went on to declare, "Such being the nature of God's kingdom, what would be the state of society most suitable to receive and promote it? We can conceive of none that is half so good as a christian community." 14 A profound distrust of secular authority in every form followed from such beliefs as these, and was intensified by the persecution which most of the sects experienced. For the spread of their doctrines, accordingly, they did not look to the state, but relied upon preaching and example. T h e latter was peculiarly the method of the communitarian sects. T h e Rappites developed the idea with great explicitness: "Supposing their [sz'c] existed a rejuvenized, equitable and philanthropic society, which with its religious, christian 8c political sentiments formed a united Whole, . . . would not all good men of feeling conceive and acknowledge that by such united powers of the social spirit, a full restoration would be produced of all hitherto defective systems?" 15 A small society, voluntarily separated from the world, striving after perfection in its institutions, sharing many things in common, and relying upon imitation for the spread of its system—such was the sectarian community. It offered a method for the religious regeneration of mankind. But might it not offer also a method for the social regeneration of mankind, apart from any specific religious doctrines? T o many social reformers in the early nineteenth century it seemed to do so. T h e communitarian idea was peculiarly attractive because alternative methods of social reform appeared to have reached a dead end during this particular period. Individualism seemed incapable of answering the nineteenth-century need for collective action. Revolution had revealed itself as a dangerous two-edged sword in the quarter-century of French and European history between 1789 and 1815. And the problems created by industrialization appeared to have so far outdistanced the ability of gradual methods to solve them that society itself was retrograding. Drastic reform was the demand, but drastic reform without revolution. Such a program the secular communitarians offered, and during the half-century following 1815 they were listened to with attention, only finally losing influence in N e w York Society for Promoting Communities, An Essay on Common Wealths (New York, 1822), p. 29. In 1736 the Moravians inaugurated their Gemeinschaft after reading Acts 2. See Adelaide L. Fries, The Moravians in Georgia, 1735-1740 (Raleigh, N.C., 1905), pp. 135-37. is Harmony Society, Thoughts on the Destiny of Man (1824), p. 52; see also pp. 7, 17, 24, 49, 65, 85-87.

8

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

the last third of the nineteenth century when gradual methods began at last to prove themselves effective. T h a t communitarianism was, in fact, a program different from individualism, from gradualism, and from revolution was fully recognized by contemporaries—by communitarians themselves, by their opponents, and by such observers as stood outside the controversy. Communitarians on both sides of the Atlantic rejected individualism as an ineffective answer to the problems facing society. "Ethics," said the French theorist Charles Fourier, "would give people good morals before giving them subsistence; it would lead men to the practice of truth before having found a means of rendering truth more profitable than falsehood." 16 No principle, declared the British communitarian Robert Owen, has ever "produced so much evil as the principle of individualism is now effecting throughout society." Consequently, "until the individual system shall be entirely abandoned, it will be useless to expect any substantial, permanent improvement in the condition of the human race." 17 In America Albert Brisbane was equally forthright in rejecting the individualistic idea that the evils of the world have their foundation "in the imperfection of human nature, or in the depravity of the passions." On the contrary, he wrote, "the root of the evil is in the social organisation itself; and, until wè attack it there, no permanent or beneficial reforms can be expected." 18 T h e communitarian had little more respect for gradual methods of reform than for the individualistic approach. " T h e Error of Reformers," wrote Fourier, "is to condemn this or that abuse of society, whereas they should condemn the whole system of Society itself, which is a circle of abuses and defects throughout." 19 He was scornful of those who wished "to obtain piece by piece all these benefits, which should be introduced collectively and simultaneously by means of Association." 20 In similar vein Owen asserted that "Society has emanated from fundamental errors of the imagination, and all the institutions and social arrangements of man over the world have been based on these errors. Society is, therefore, through all its ramifi»8 Publication des manuscrits de Charles Fourier [tome IV], Années 1857-58 (Paris, 1858), p. 356. Unless otherwise stated, translations are by the present writer. " Owen, A Developement of the Principles and Plans on Which to Establish SelfSupporting Home Colonies (2d ed., London, 1841), p. 31; cited hereafter as Home Colonies; "Address . . . on Wednesday, the 27th of April, 1825. in the Hall of New-Harmony, Indiana," New-Harmony Gazette, I, 1 (Oct. I, 1825). 1 8 Albert Brisbane. Social Destiny of Man: or, Association and Reorganization of Industry (Philadelphia, 1840), pp. 2, 27. 1 9 Charles Fourier, Le Nouveau Monde industriel et sociétaire (Paris, 1829), p. xv. T h e translation is that which Albert Brisbane used as a motto in his periodical The Phalanx (New York), p. 2 (Oct. 5, 1843). 20 Fourier, Traité de l'association domestique-agricole (2 vols., Paris, 1822), I, 72.

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

9

cations, artificial and corrupt." Other reformers, Owen complained, plan "a change only in some of the effects necessarily produced by these original errors or causes of evil." For his part, he insisted that "change must be made on principles the reverse of those on which society has hitherto been formed and governed." This change "could not be one of slow progression, but it must take place at once, and make an immediate, and almost instantaneous, revolution in the minds and manners of the society in which it shall be introduced." 21 Similar words were written by Brisbane in America, "Whoever will examine the question of social ameliorations, must be convinced, that the perfecting of Civilization [i.e., the existing social order] is useless as a remedy for present social evils, and that the only effectual means of doing away with indigence, idleness and the dislike for labor is to do away with civilization itself, and organize Association . . . in its place." 22 Communitarians, in other words, were demanding reforms as farreaching, as drastic, and as rapid as those that appeared in any revolutionary program. 23 Yet they rejected completely the method of revolution. Fourier argued that "in themselves and by reason of the measures which they provoke, revolutions are incapable of creating anything which lives and lasts," 24 and he promised that his plan would "extirpate all the germs of revolution." 25 His leading disciple, Victor Considérant, laid down, as one of two fundamental conditions, "that every plan of social reform, if it is good, must seek not to impose itself through violence or by means of authority, but to make itself freely accepted by reason of the genuine advantages that it is capable of procuring for all classes." 26 Across the Channel, Robert Owen 21 Owen, Book of the New Moral World [Part I] (London, 1836), p. iv; Lectures on the Rational System of Society (London, 1841), pp. 19-20, 21; Discourse in Washington, Feb. 25, 1825, reprinted in New-Harmony Gazette, II, 241 (May 2, 1827). For complete bibliographical data on the discourse last cited, see below, p. 112, n. 71. In all quoted passages, italics are as found in the original, unless otherwise stated. 22 Brisbane, Social Destiny of Man (1840), p. 286. 2s In fact, Theodore D. Woolsey, a conservative critic of socialism, felt that the communitarian plan was more drastic than the revolutionary, for the latter "scarcely has had in view . . . so great a change and separation from the society of the present . . . as some of the communities . . . have introduced on the small scale." Communism and Socialism (1880), p. 9. Compare J. A. R. Marriott, The French Revolution of 1848 in Its Economic Aspect (2 vols., Oxford, 1913), I, xxvi. 24 Hubert Bourgin, Fourier: Contribution à l'étude du socialisme français (Paris, 1905), p. 237. See also the passages from Fourier's writings compiled under "Révolution" in E. Silberling, Dictionnaire de sociologie phalanstérienne (Paris, 1911), pp. 381-82. 25 Fourier, Traité de l'association (1822), II, 3. 2« Victor Considérant, Exposition abrégée du système phalanstérien de Fourier (3e éd., Paris, 1845), p. 15.

10

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

voiced the same ideas, "Extensive,—nay, rather, universal,—as the re-arrangement of society must be, to relieve it from the difficulties with which it is now overwhelmed, it will be effected in peace and quietness, with the goodwill and hearty concurrence of all parties, and of every people." 27 Class struggle was explicitly rejected along with the other characteristically revolutionary ideas. In 1819, in "An Address to the Working Classes," Robert Owen stated, as his first conclusion, that "the rich and the poor, the governors and the governed, have really but one interest." Even after actively participating in militant labor unionism, Owen in 1841 was still criticizing the Chartists because they "keep class divided against class." He presented his own communitarian plan as a direct contrast: All former changes have had in view the supposed interest of some class, some sect, some party, or some country;—some change for the particular advantage of some portion of the human race, to the exclusion of, or in opposition to, some other portion or division of it. This change has no such exclusion or division of interest . . . ; but it steadily contemplates the permanent high advantage of every child of man. 2 8

This point of view was neatly condensed in the name that Owen gave to the organization he founded in 1835—the "Association of All Classes of All Nations." In similar language, Fourier boasted that it was an "inherent property" of his system "to content all classes, all parties." 29 T h e American Fourierites, for their part, quoted with approval the words of Horace Greeley, one of their most influential sympathizers: N o t through hatred, collision, and depressing competition; not through War, whether of N a t i o n against Nation, Class against Class, or Capital against Labor; but through U n i o n , Harmony, and the reconciling of all Interests, the giving scope to all noble Sentiments and Aspirations, is the R e n o v a t i o n of the World, the Elevation of the degraded and suffering Masses of Mankind, to be sought and effected. 3 0

Revolutionary reformers saw as clearly as did the communitarians the sharp divergence between their systems. Much as Karl Marx adOwen, Report to the County of Lanark (Glasgow, 1821), as reprinted among the appendices to The Life of Robert Owen, Written by Himself (2 vols, [numbered I and I.A], London, 1857-58), I.A, 287. Quotations herein from Owen's publications up to and including 1821 are taken from this work, hereafter cited as Owen, Life . . . Written by Himself, or simply Owen, Life. 28 Owen, "An Address to the Working Classes," March 29, 1819, in Life, I.A, 230; Lectures on the Rational System (1841), pp. 110, 145. 29 Fourier, Nouveau Monde (1829), p. 15. 30 Printed as a motto in Albert Brisbane, A Concise Exposition of the Doctrine of Association (2d ed., New York, 1843), cover and title page.

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

11

mired some elements in Fourier's thinking, he and Friedrich Engels, when they composed the Communist Manifesto, classified all communitarian theories as "Critical-Utopian Socialism and Communism," an epithet that was half commendatory and half derogatory. As critics, the communitarians "are full of the most valuable materials for the enlightenment of the working class," said Marx and Engels, because "they attack every principle of existing society." But the "utopian" element in their thought, according to the Manifesto, vitiates all their teaching: The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own surroundings, cause socialists of this kind to consider themselves far superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class. . . . Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social gospel. . . . The practical measures proposed . . . point solely to the disappearance of class antagonisms. . . . These proposals, therefore, are of a purely Utopian character.31

After the failure of the great revolutionary efforts of 1848, when the revolutionary method itself seemed to many to be discredited, Marx felt obliged to denounce even more sharply the renewed tendency of the working class to throw itself "upon doctrinaire experiments . . . ; in other words, . . . into movements, in which it gives up the task of revolutionizing the old world with its own large collective weapons, and, on the contrary, seeks to bring about its emancipation, behind the back of society, in private ways, within the narrow bounds of its own class conditions, and, consequently, inevitably fails." 82 31 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848), translated by Samuel Moore in collaboration with Engels (1888), reprinted in Algernon Lee, ed., The Essentials of Marx (New York, 1926), pp. 62-63; cited hereafter as Communist Manifesto, with page references to this reprint. T h e authoritative German text is in Marx and Engels, Historisch-kritisch Gesamtausgabe, Werke, Schriften, Briefe, ed. for the Marx-Engels-Lenin-Institut by D. Rjazanov [pseudonym of D. B. Goldendach] and V. Adoratskij (projected in 4 multi-volume Abteilungen, b u t uncompleted; Frankfurt-am-Main, Berlin, Moscow, successively, 1929-35), I. Abteilung, VI, 523-57, with notes 682-86; cited hereafter as MarxEngels Gesamtausgabe. For commentary see the critical editions of the Communist Manifesto by Charles Andler (2 vols., Paris, 1901), and by D. Ryazanoff [iic], translated by Eden and Cedar Paul (London, 1930). 32 Marx, Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852), translated by Daniel De Leon (New York, 1898), p. 10. T h e quoted passage appears entirely in capitals in this translation.

12

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

T h e line between revolutionary and communitarian reform was so sharply drawn that contemporaries—even though bitterly opposed to both—never confused them. T h e task of communitarians in the nineteenth century was not to defend themselves against the charge of subversive activity, but to demonstrate to moderate-minded men the practicability of their plans. No one did so more persuasively than Albert Brisbane: If we look around us, we see numerous Parties, laboring isolatedly to carry out various reforms—political, administrative, currency, abolition, temperance, moral, &c. 8cc.—which proves, First, the depth and extent of the evil that preys upon Society, and Second, the necessity of a fundamental Reform, which will attack that evil at its root and eradicate it effectually, instead of lopping off a few branches. . . . T h e reform we contemplate, although fundamental in its character, is not destructive, but constructive; it . . . will change quietly and by substitution, what is false and defective; it will violate no rights, injure no class; . . . but will improve and elevate the condition of all, without taking from any. It can moreover be tried on a small scale, and it will only spread, when practice has shown its superiority over the present system. Unlike political reforms, which, to effect the smallest change of policy, agitate and often convulse a whole country, and array one half of the People against the other half, it will not affect a space as large as a township and but a few hundred persons, and will not extend beyond these narrow limits unless its advantages— practically demonstrated—excite a strong and general approbation in its favor. 3 3

There were several distinct points to the argument. First of all, the communitarian approach to reform could be thoroughly voluntary. Not only was membership in a community a matter of individual choice, but the whole process by which communitarianism was expected to spread and remake the world was conceived of in noncoercive terms. Voluntary imitation, the communitarian believed, would suffice. "And let us suppose only one such society to exist in the world, which possesses and exercises those principles, what is more natural than that many nations should become gradually in union with it," argued the leaders of the sectarian Harmony Society. 34 Owen possessed the same confidence. " I t may be safely predicted," he wrote, "that one of these new associations cannot be formed without creating a general desire throughout society to establish others, and that they will rapidly multiply." 35 T h e British socialist, in fact, was ready to begin with recipients of poor relief, quite confident that an improvement in their lot would occur so quickly as to make the Brisbane, Concise Exposition (2d ed., 1843), p. 4. Harmony Society, Thoughts on the Destiny of Man (1824), p. 24. See also John S. Duss, The Harmonists: A Personal History (Harrisburg, Pa., 1943), p. 60. 3 5 Owen, Report to the County of Lanark (1820), in Life, I.A, 303. 33 34

COMMUNITARIAN POINT OF VIEW

13

erstwhile paupers "the envy of the rich and indolent under the existing arrangements." Of course, Owen argued, "no part of society will long continue in a worse condition than the individuals within such proposed establishments." Consequently "the change from the OLD system to the NEW must become universal." Moreover it "will proceed solely from proof, in practice, of the very great superiority of the new arrangements over the old." 36 This faith was shared by Charles Fourier. In his first book he promised that the application of his societary principles to "a single canton will be imitated spontaneously in all countries, owing simply to the allurement of the immense advantages and the innumerable enjoyments which this order assures to all individuals." He asked his hearers "to prepare themselves for the most astonishing and most fortunate event which can take place on the globe, . . . the sudden passage from social chaos to universal harmony." He was deadly serious as he went on to advise his fellows to build no new buildings but to beget children, for, he argued, all the structures of the world will have to be altered, but three-year-olds will be the most precious assets of all in the coming order. 37 In the second place, the communitarian program was more genuinely experimental than any of its rivals. Experiment, after all, involves the possibility of failure, and communitarians pointed out that the failure of revolutionary programs (or even gradual ones if applied to an entire nation) could be immensely dangerous. Dr. Charles Pellarin, disciple and biographer of Fourier, exclaimed that an individual who should manage his business as nations in general manage theirs, when innovations are to be introduced, would rightly be considered as crazy. Suppose an agriculturist . . . wishes to make an experiment in cultivation, would he, unless evidently devoid of sense, apply it to the whole of his estate at once? T h e nations do this, however; they stake their fortune upon a single throw in the game of revolutions. T h e social experiments which they try are . . . enormously burdensome, because they are tried at once upon 33 millions of men, upon 28,000 square leagues of territory. If experimental chemistry should proceed in this manner, it would every day run the risk of blowing up our cities. 38 38 Owen, "Fourth Letter," Sept. 6, 1817, in Life, I.A, 126; Report to the County of Lanark (1821), ibid., p. 310. 3 7 Fourier, Théorie des quatre mouvemens (Leipzig [actually Lyon], 1808), pp. 19, iv, 421-22; cited hereafter as Quatre Mouvements. 38 Charles Pellarin, The Life of Charles Fourier, 2d ed., translated by Francis Geo. Shaw (New York, 1848), p. 31. Pellarin elaborated the argument in an essay entitled "L'Expérimentation et l'empirisme en matière sociale," contained in his ed. of Lettre de Fourier au grand juge (Paris, 1874), pp. 87-88. See also Fourier's own statement that his plan was designed "to operate upon the entire world, savage, barbarian, and civilized; to metamorphose the whole by an experiment limited to a square league and 1800 persons. What a contrast with the philosophy

14

BACKWOODS U T O P I A S

T h e communitarians were fond of describing their proposals in terms of experimentation. Even the religious communities did so. " T r u e and real inlightning [sic]," declared the Harmony Society in Indiana, involves "many and every trial of practical, religious, as well as political experiments, to discover . . . the best . . . means . . . for the general welfare." 39 William Maclure, colleague of Robert Owen at New Harmony, and himself a distinguished man of science, stated the communitarian ideal of experimentation with perhaps the greatest clarity of all: Each township might experiment on every thing that could conduce to their comfort and happiness, without interfering with the interests of their neighbors; thereby reducing all political, moral, or religious experiments to their [.sic] simplicity, facility and utility of mechanism, manufactures and all the useful arts; that is, that a failure could only hurt the contrivers and executors of the speculation, forcing them to nullify their mistakes, and guaranteeing them against a perseverance in error. 4 0

Experiment implies a well-formulated hypothesis, and the invention of methods to test it. This element of deliberate inventiveness and reasoned choice is a third characteristic of communitarian philosophy. Planning and choice must figure in any program of social reform, of course, but there is a marked difference in emphasis between the social inventiveness cultivated by communitarians, and the Marxist reliance upon historically generated social forces. T h e Marxists themselves made much of the distinction. T h e Communist Manifesto condemned Owen, Fourier, and the other so-called Utopians for their belief that Historical action is to yield to their personal inventive action, historically created conditions of emancipation to fantastic ones, and the gradual, spontaneous class-organization of the proletariat to an organization of society especially contrived by these inventors. Future history resolves itself, that throws empires into confusion from top to bottom without a single guarantee of good results!" Nouveau Monde (1829), p. xv. 39 Harmony Society, Thoughts on the Destiny of Man (1824), p. 41. 4 0 William Maclure, Opinions on Various Subjects, Dedicated to the Industrious Producers (3 vols., New Harmony, Ind., 1831-38), III, 9. Apropos of Owen's choice of New Harmony for his community the Cincinnati Literary Gazette commented: "There are no people, probably, in the world, who are so ready to make experiments respecting social relations and domestic arrangements, as those of the western country. . . . On this account we consider the location of Mr. Owen's theatre of operations, as exceedingly well chosen, if his object be merely to make an experiment of the feasibility of his plans." Ill, 193 (June 18, 1825). The experimental aspect of communitarianism is discussed in Merle Curti, Growth of American Thought (New York, 1943), pp. 263-65 (which quotes the foregoing passage), and Woolsey, Communism and Socialism, pp. 5, 22.

COMMUNITARIAN P O I N T OF VIEW

15

in their eyes, into the propaganda and the practical carrying out of their social plans. 41 Friedrich Engels, coauthor of the Manifesto, elaborated this criticism in a later work, often reprinted in part under the title Socialism, Utopian and Scientific: T h e solution of the social problems, which as yet lay hidden in undeveloped economic conditions, the Utopians attempted to evolve out of the human brain. Society presented nothing but wrongs; to remove these was the task of reason. It was necessary, then, to discover a new and more perfect system of social order and to impose this upon society from without by propaganda, and, wherever it was possible, by the example of model experiments. 42 T h o u g h a philosophy of history is by no means absent, communitarian writings are, in truth, concerned more with inventing solutions to social problems than with investigating deterministic historical trends. Charles Fourier was typically communitarian when he bewailed the three thousand years of felicity which the human race had missed because his system had not been discovered sooner, and when he announced that mankind could skip at least two definite and expected steps in its upward evolution by promptly adopting his proposals. 4 3 T h e varied characteristics of communitarian thought were brought together in concise but comprehensive summary by Victor Considérant, Fourier's leading disciple, at the conclusion of a course of lectures he delivered in 1841: T h e theory of Fourier may be deemed both liberal and conservative at once, for it aims at universal transformation, without directly or abruptly interfering with society. It proposes to substitute riches in lieu of poverty, liberty in lieu of anarchy and despotism, peaceful industry and progress in lieu of revolutionary change; to . . . substitute, in fact, a better and a different order of society without convulsive change or dangerous innovation: and to obtain these marvellous results, the simple combination of industrial series in Phalansterian association is deemed amply sufficient, under the protection of existing institutions. Industry is the basis of its operations, and superior wealth and morality its immediate aim. Nothing can be more simple, harmless, and legitimate. All parties are equally interested in its success, and nothing dangerous can be apprehended from •>1 Communist Manifesto, p. 62. 4 2 Friedrich Engels, Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, translated by Edward Aveling (New York: International Publishers [1935]), p. 36. Originally published as part of his Herrn Eugen Dühring's Umwälzung der Wissenschaft (1878), these chapters were arranged by Engels for separate publication under the new title in 1880. ->3 Fourier, Traité de l'association (1822), II, 426; see also his Nouveau Monde (1829), p. xii.

16

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

its failure, for its operations are confined to individual interests, and that on a very limited scale. In case of failure almost nothing would be lost; and if success attended the experiment, the most desirable change would be effected in the general condition of humanity. T h e poorest classes in society would be elevated to a state of moral dignity and industrial independency, while the rich would be secure in the enjoyment of their wealth, and all the human race, in time, would be improved and elevated to its real destiny. 44

Each of the characteristics of communitarianism made a special appeal to Americans in the middle decades of the nineteenth century. Its faith that men can remake their institutions by reasoned choice evoked natural response in the United States, whose people believed they had done this very thing in their own constitution-making. T h e communitarian belief in social harmony as opposed to class warfare was certainly the prevalent hope of Americans generally. T h e communitarian emphasis upon voluntary action met exactly the American conception of freedom. T h e experimental aspect of communitarianism found ready echo in a nation of experimenters, in a nation that viewed even itself as an experiment. Most significant of all, the group procedure that was the heart of the communitarian program corresponded to a like tendency that ramified through many American institutions and many fields of American thought. Government and law provide striking illustrations of this tendency. Students of Germanic institutions, notably Otto von Gierke, have traced this feeling for the group far back into medieval political philosophy and jurisprudence. Whereas the Roman codes were generally suspicious of associations and granted the privilege of incorporation grudgingly, Germanic law, Gierke points out, was remarkable for the encouragement it gave to the formation of an association or fellowship (Genossenschaft). Gierke glorifies "that inexhaustible Germanic spirit of association, which knows how to secure for all-narrower members of the state an original, independent life, and . . . to create . . . , for the most general as for the most particular purposes of human existence, an incalculable wealth of associations which are not animated from above but act spontaneously." 45 In his translation of Gierke's work, Frederic William Maitland carries the argument over into the field of AngloAmerican law, calling the roll of groups that might demand attention 4 4 Considérant, Exposition abrégée (3e éd., 1845), pp. 54-55; employing the free translation by Hugh Doherty printed in London Phalanx, I, 252 (July 17, 1841). Doherty interpolated the word gradually in the second sentence; this has been omitted, using the customary indication. 4 s Otto von Gierke, Das deutsche Genossenschaftsrecht (4 vols., Berlin, 18681913), I, 3; as translated by John D. Lewis in an appendix to his GenossenschaftTheory of Otto von Gierke (University of Wisconsin, Studies in the Social Sciences and History, no. 25; Madison, 1935), p. 114.

COMMUNITARIAN P O I N T OF VIEW

17

in an English treatise equivalent to Gierke's. "The English historian," he concludes, "would have a wealth of group-life to survey richer even than that which has come under Dr Gierke's eye." 46 T h e growth of this group-life was spontaneous and irrepressible. W h e n formal legal doctrine was inhospitable to such self-constituted associations, as Maitland shows, they took shelter under the flexible English concept of the trust. T o America, then, the English settlers brought a habit of forming themselves freely into groups. T h e Mayflower Compact 4 7 is a classic illustration of the instinctive feeling that spontaneous associations possess an incontestable right to exist, in fact and in the eyes of the law. T h e conditions of frontier existence 48 and the progress of democratic ideas encouraged the formation of voluntary associations. Alexis de Tocqueville notes it as one of the outstanding characteristics of the American Republic: T h e political associations that exist in the United States are only a single feature in the midst of the immense assemblage of associations in that country. Americans of all ages, all conditions, and all dispositions constantly form associations. They have not only commercial and manufacturing companies, in which all take part, but associations of a thousand other kinds, religious, moral, serious, futile, general or restricted, enormous or diminutive. . . . I met with several kinds of associations in America of which I confess I had no previous notion; and I have often admired the extreme skill with which the inhabitants of the United States succeed in proposing a common object for the exertions of a great many men and in inducing them voluntarily to pursue it. . . . Civil associations . . . facilitate political association; but, on the other hand, political association singularly strengthens and improves associations for civil purposes. . . . Thus political life makes the love and practice of association more general; it imparts a desire of union and teaches the means of combination to numbers of men who otherwise would have always lived apart. 49 46 F. W. Maitland, introduction to his translation of Gierke, Political Theories of the Middle Age (Cambridge, 1900), p. xxvii; see also pp. xxix-xxxvii. *" Cited in this connection by Maitland, p. xxxi. Compare Frederick Jackson T u r n e r ' s observation: "From the first, it was evident that these men [of the backwoods] had means of supplementing their individual activity by informal combinations. One of the things that impressed all early travelers in the United States was the capacity for extra-legal association. . . . T h i s power of the pioneers to join together for a common end, without the intervention of governmental institutions, was one of their marked characteristics." The United States, 1830-1850: The Nation and Its Sections (New York, 1935), p. 21. 49 Tocqueville, Democracy in America, translated by Henry Reeve, revised by Francis Bowen, corrected and ed. by Phillips Bradley (2 vols., New York, 1945), II, 106,115.

18

BACKWOODS

UTOPIAS

Federalism, in the sense opposed to consolidated nationalism, is an important complement of this respect for, and encouragement of, autonomous groups. It is therefore no accident that many close parallels to the communitarian argument may be found in the classic expositions of the role of states in the American federal system. According to L o r d Bryce, Federalism enables a people to try experiments in legislation a n d administration which could not be safely tried in a large centralized country. A comparatively small commonwealth like an American State easily makes a n d unmakes its laws; mistakes are not serious, for they are soon corrected; other States profit by the experience of a law or a method which has worked well or ill in the State that has tried it. 6 0

President Franklin D. Roosevelt expressed the idea more colloquially to his Secretary of Labor: " T h e beauty of our state-federal system is that the people can experiment. If it has fatal consequences in one place, it has little effect upon the rest of the country. If a new, apparently fanatical, program works well, it will be copied. If it doesn't, you won't hear of it again." 51 In his famous dissent in the case of T r u a x v. Corrigan, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes urged the Supreme Court not "to prevent the making of social experiments that an important part of the community desires, in the insulated chambers afforded by the several States, even though the experiments may seem futile or even noxious." 52 T h i s idea of political experiment on a small scale is a precise counterpart of the communitarian philosophy, with its conception of the community as an insulated laboratory for testing social measures. Communitive writers, in fact, sometimes presented their arguments as the final flowering of the federal idea. William Maclure, Owen's associate in the New Harmony community, insisted that federation had hitherto failed to reveal its full potentialities because it had been applied to political units that were too large and heterogeneous. Its greatest perfection would come when put into effect among small communitarian societies. " T h e uniting, by the federation system, any number of cooperative associations, would multiply and vary the enjoyments of the social order, ad infinitum." 53 So ingrained in American experience was the idea of group pro50 Bryce, American Commonwealth (3d ed., 1893), I, 353; see also p. 345. si Frances Perkins, The Roosevelt I Knew (New York, 1946), p. 124. Compare Roosevelt's description of the Tennessee Valley project as "a laboratory for the Nation," in his Public Papers and Addresses, II (New York, 1938), 129. 5 2 257 U.S. 312, at 344 (Dec. 19, 1921); also printed in Holmes, Dissenting Opinions, ed. by Alfred Lief (New York, 1929), p. 13. 5 3 Maclure, Opinions, I (1831), 40-42. For a similar argument from federalism, see Parke Godwin's address in The Phalanx, p. 113 (April 21, 1844).

COMMUNITARIAN P O I N T OF V I E W

19

cedure—of trying political and social experiments upon units of society less than the whole—that communitarians found little difficulty in winning a hearing for their own proposals, couched as they were in familiar terms. For many liberals and reformers, in fact, the communitarian approach had become almost instinctive in midnineteenth-century America. N o clearer illustration can be found than a paragraph by an anonymous contributor to the antislavery Liberator in 1840: Can society ever be constituted upon principles of universal Christian brotherhood? T h e believing Christian, the enlightened philosopher, answer —IT CAN. Will this organization commence with the entire race of man? with existing governments? or with small isolated communities. Doubtless, the principles of this new organization must be matured in the hearts and lives of individuals, before they can be embodied in any community, but when the new organization commences, it will doubtless be in small communities. 54 T h i s was the communitarian faith. 54 "Co-operative Associations," Liberator, X, 207 (Dec. 25, 1840V

Chapter II HOLY COMMONWEALTHS: THE COMMUNITIVE SECTS THE communitarian idea came to fullest flower in the New World, but its seeds were brought from the Old. T o be precise, they were brought not from Europe generally but from a restricted zone of religious radicalism that stretched from central Europe to the British Isles. Theological tensions were apparent in this region before the Reformation, but it was the struggle between Catholicism and Protestantism that made clear the existence and delimited the boundaries of this religious frontier. During the Reformation it constituted the borderland in which the great organized churches, Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist, battled for supremacy, and in which smaller sects sprang up amidst the tangle of conflicting ideas. Beginning near the eastern boundary of the Holy Roman Empire in Moravia, this religious frontier circled the northern and western fringes of Bohemia, touching Saxony, Thuringia, and the Upper Palatinate. It reached the Danube near Ratisbon or Regensburg, and it comprised the entire triangle framed on south and west by the upper Danube and the upper Rhine—that is, Wurtemberg, and the Swabian and Franconian lands in general. T h e apex of this triangle rested on the borders of Switzerland, the country of Zwingli and later the center of Calvin's work. Down the Rhine to its mouth in the Low Countries ran the belt of religious unsettlement, taking in Alsace, the Rhenish Palatinate, Westphalia, and the northern Netherlands. T h e zone of conflict projected itself, finally, across the North Sea to include Great Britain. 1 In this meandering borderland, the struggle between the major contending churches unloosed religious and social forces far more radical in tendency than Luther and the other reformers had bargained for. T h e very intensity of theological conflict encouraged speculation, and the absence of settled ecclesiastical authority made 1 See Karl Heussi and H e r m a n n Mulcrt, Atlas zur Kirchengeschichte (3e Aufl., T ü b i n g e n , 1937), plates X and XI, which picture the religious situation at successive dates between 1529 and 1740. Minor sects can only be shown impressionistically upon such a map, but their location with reference to the boundary line between the major creeds is clear.

20

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

21

possible (though nonetheless perilous) the preaching of novel and dissident faiths. T h e social implications of the new doctrines, moreover, proved oftentimes more radical than the theological. T h e strength of Anabaptism lay in precisely this religious borderland. Its beginnings are conventionally associated with the "prophets" of Zwickau, on the German side of the Bohemian boundary, and with the preaching of Balthasar Hiibmaier at Waldshut near the northern border of Switzerland. It spread rapidly to southern Germany, to Moravia (whither Hiibmaier himself journeyed), then to the north German plain and the Netherlands. And it reached its most notorious climax in the millenarian kingdom at Miinster in Westphalia in 1534-35, where communism and polygamy provided the high-water mark of social nonconformity. In England, too, the religious ferment produced doctrines with radical social corollaries. Before the close of the sixteenth century, conservative English Puritans felt called upon to denounce the radicals in their midst who would "bringe in equalitie amonge all men, and woulde have all things in common and no man to be riche." 2 During the period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth, in the mid-seventeenth century, theological, political, and economic radicalism was made manifest in such religious groups as the Quakers, the Levellers, and the Fifth Monarchy Men, and reached a climax of direct economic action on April 1, 1649, when the followers of Gerrard Winstanley "began to digge, and to take possession of the commons for the poor on George-Hill in Surrey." 3 Besides giving a stimulus to new ideas, the doctrinal conflict within this great religious frontier generated the most intense of social pressures—ferocious persecution and savage warfare. A century before Luther, the Hussite War had ravaged Bohemia. In Luther's day the Peasants' War spread through Swabia, Franconia, the Palatinate, Thuringia, and Saxony. T h e Thirty Years' War of the seventeenth century, which ultimately engulfed Europe, commenced in Bohemia and the Palatinate and seared the Rhineland with devastations that did not heal for generations. Finally in the long chronicle of religious strife came the Civil War in England, proving that even that island realm could not escape the armed struggle which religious and social tension had engendered in the ideological borderlands of the Continent. After a century and a half of terror and suffering, it is no wonder that multitudes of men and women should have lost all hope for a = Jo. Fieldus or Fielclc, "A Briefe Confession of Faythe" (1572), in The Seconde Parte of a Register, ed. by Albert Peel (2 vols., Cambridge [England], 1915), I, 87. f Gerrard Winstanley, Works, . . . With an Appendix of Documents Relating to the Digger Movement, ed. by George H. Sabine (Ithaca, N.Y., 1941), p. 392.

22

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

gradual reform of existing society, and should have placed their faith in the scriptural promise of new heavens and a new earth, where "they shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: . . . They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble." 4 T h e dawn of a complete new day was their prayer, not a mere sweeping away of the clouds that darkened the old. Even to the eyes of faith, however, there appeared little prospect of such a dawn in the lands prostrated by the wars of religion and by the later aggressions of Louis XIV. Emigration offered one way out, and a steady stream of Germans left the Palatinate and other parts of Germany for provincial Pennsylvania in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, carrying with them a heritage of religious radicalism, a vivid memory of trouble and injustice, and a profound millennial hope. It was the experience of migration, in most instances, that caused these social yearnings to crystallize in communitarian form. Migration, after all, was a search for a new and better society, and it involved, in colonial America particularly, the temporary creation of new social institutions. T o a certain extent every group settlement possessed some characteristics of a communitarian experiment. Among most migrating groups these communitive tendencies were superficial and fleeting, but among the sectarian immigrants forces of a peculiar kind were at work, strengthening such tendencies to the point where actual communitarian institutions came into being. T o begin with, the sense both of unity and of separateness was far stronger among the sects than among other types of immigrants. Transplantation further intensified this feeling. In leaving home the sect had deliberately detached itself from the larger whole to which it had once belonged, and it could not, even under the best of circumstances, expect immediate assimilation into the new society that surrounded it. In fact, it did not wish such assimilation. Its separation from the world was an article of faith, which was reinforced, not undermined, by opposition and difficulty. Difficulties were of many kinds—economic pressure, religious persecution, and the subtler forms of hostility that are visited upon immigrants of alien culture and foreign tongue. It was characteristic of the sect that its members responded to such pressures as a united group, coalescing rather than dispersing to meet the difficulties in their way. In the new land, moreover, a process of natural selection began to operate upon the radicalism which the sect brought with it. T h e separateness of its life prevented it from contributing its social ideas to the general current of political and social agitation in the American colonies. T h a t is to say, its idealism found no outlet in move4 Isaiah 65:22-23.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

23

ments for gradual reform. O n the other hand, revolutionary programs, to which the sect might once have inclined, became irrelevant in the new situation. T h e conditions and the authorities against which it might once have revolted belonged to the land it had left, and it possessed neither the motive nor the power to alter by revolution the institutions among which it now found itself. Only communitarianism remained as a distinctive program. T h e sect that clung with religious fidelity to its ideal of a completely reconstructed society became more positively communitarian in outlook and polity than it had been in Europe. Before we take u p chronologically the development of the sectarian communities in America, it will be well to look more closely at the process by which religious bodies were transformed into communitarian colonies. T h e histories of the Moravians and the Shakers in America illustrate fully and clearly the forces at work. T h e "Renewed Church" of the United Brethren (Unitas Fratrum), otherwise known as the Moravians, dates from 1722, when fugitives from religious persecution in Bohemia and Moravia found refuge on the estate of Count Nicholas Ludwig von Zinzendorf, at Bethelsdorf in Saxony. These fugitives were remnants of the Bohemian Brethren, who, despite almost complete eclipse, had maintained Apostolic Succession from the fifteenth century. Under the pressure of persecution the Brethren on Zinzendorf's estate manifested collectivistic tendencies of two types. Within the community, which they called H e r r n h u t , they "rapidly developed an exclusive social and economic structure." In addition, their "deep-seated feeling of political and economic insecurity" led them to plant missionary colonies abroad, and they developed collective institutions to make such emigration practicable. "Wherever possible the Church bought land for these missionaries to form settlements. These colonies were societies or communities of missionaries." 5 In 1741 the Moravians established their most important settlements, at Bethlehem and Nazareth in N o r t h a m p t o n County, Pennsylvania. Communitarian tendencies, already manifested at H e r r n h u t , were intensified by the arrangements the Moravians made during the passage from Europe to America—the so-called "Sea Congregations." I n the New World, faced by the difficulties of maintaining themselves and by the dangers of Indian attack, their communism crystallized at Bethlehem into the so-called "General Economy." T h i s was explicitly formulated in 1744, and it lasted until 1762. 5 Jacob John Sessler, Communal Pietism among Early American Moravians (American Religion Series, VIII; New York, 1933), pp. 18, 16, 17. For further information on the literature of the communitarian sects discussed in this chapter, see the Bibliographical Essay at the end of the present work.

24

BACKWOODS

UTOPIAS

Each member contributed his time and labor to the General Economy, which gave no wages in return, b u t provided food, clothing, and shelter for members and their children. Because the church purchased the land and the individual members brought almost nothing with them, there was no actual surrender of private possessions already existing. O n the other h a n d , all the fruits of the members' labor— including the buildings a n d industries created by them—belonged to the General Economy, that is, to the church. T h e mingling of social and religious factors so characteristic of all American sectarian communities is b r o u g h t out clearly in the Moravian experiment. T h e General Economy, says its most scholarly historian, was the practical result of exigencies in the new situation; the Brethren b o u n d themselves together for purposes of mutual support, protection against the Indians, missionary endeavors, the preservation of the customs of their Fatherland, and the continuance of their religious practices. Nevertheless there was a definite theological idea behind both the European and the American Moravian communities. After the renewal of the Church, they thought of themselves as a small theocratic republic. . . . Such a theocratic community did not allow extensive intermingling with outsiders. T h e community was a family of which Christ was the head, and their whole system of worship was built about this theocratic idea. It implied that the community life had to be exclusive. 6

T h e c o m m u n i t a r i a n organization of the Moravians h a d existed, in germ at least, before their migration, and the new American environment served simply to bring it to full fruition. Among the sects generally, however, it was more f r e q u e n t for communitarian institutions to develop u n d e r the pressure of American conditions, without previous foreshadowing in Europe. Such was the case with the Shakers. T h e little g r o u p of sectarians in mid-eighteenth-century England of whom A n n Lee became the leader appear to have developed no particularly collectivistic institutions in their mother country, a n d even after their migration to the United States in 1774 they at first f o u n d separate employment for themselves. Persecution, however, began; and d u r i n g the Revolutionary W a r it was particularly intense because of the recent English origin of the sect.7 Indeed, the fact that the Shakers, unlike the Moravians a n d most of the other communitarian sects, were an English-speaking g r o u p exposed rather t h a n protected them. T h e i r proselytizing activities were felt—correctly 6

Sessler, Communal Pietism, pp. 86-87. ' See Victor H. I'altsits, ed., Alinules of the Commissioners for Detecting and Defeating Conspiracies in the State of New York: Albany County Sessions, J77S-17S1 (3 vols., Albany, 1909), II, 469-71, 504, 589, 592; and Henry C. Blinn, Life and Gospel Experience of Mother Ann Lee (East Canterbury, N.H., 1901), pp. 83-90.

COMMUNITIVE

SECTS

25

e n o u g h — t o b e a greater m e n a c e to e s t a b l i s h e d d e n o m i n a t i o n s t h a n the efforts of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e sects. P e r s e c u t i o n a n d the h a r d s h i p of m a k i n g a l i v i n g c o m b i n e d w i t h the m i l l e n n i a l h o p e s of the Shakers t o i m p e l t h e m f o r w a r d i n t o a f u l l y c o m m u n i t a r i a n way of life. T h e forces at work, a n d the process itself, are r e v e a l e d so clearly i n the early official histories of the sect, that the story m a y p r o p e r l y be told i n the Shakers' o w n words: After M o t h e r A n n a n d her little family arrived in this country, they passed through many scenes of difficulty, of a temporal nature. Being strangers in the land, and without any means of subsistence, excepting the daily labor of their own hands, they were obliged to seek employment where they could find it without hazarding the free e n j o y m e n t of their faith. . . . T h e y were led however, to make some arrangements, in the first place, for their f u t u r e residence, where they could be united in the m u t u a l enjoym e n t of their faith, and wait the call of God to more extensive usefulness. Accordingly William Lee and J o h n Hocknell went u p the river and contracted for a lot of land near Niskeyuna, in the county of Albany, a n d returned again to New-York. . . . T h u s , after passing through many trying scenes, M o t h e r A n n a n d those who stood f a i t h f u l with her, were collected together, and in the m o n t h of September, 1776, took u p their residence in the woods of Watervliet, near Niskeyuna, a b o u t seven miles north-west of Albany. T h e place being then in a wilderness state, they began, with indefatigable zeal a n d industry, a n d through additional sufferings, to p r e p a r e the way for a p e r m a n e n t settlement, where they could enjoy their faith in peace, amid the tumults of the war, in which the country was then involved. . . . A m i s s i o n a r y j o u r n e y t h r o u g h N e w E n g l a n d , l a s t i n g f r o m 1781 to 1783, was f o l l o w e d by the d e a t h of A n n L e e o n S e p t e m b e r 8, 1784. T h e official narrative c o n t i n u e s : T h e society being now deprived of the visible presence and protection of Mother A n n , Father James [Whittaker] saw and felt, with many others, the necessity of laboring for an increase of the substance of the gospel a m o n g the people, in order to m a i n t a i n the testimony a n d protect them f r o m the snares of wickedness which s u r r o u n d e d them, and the flood of opposition which now seemed ready to burst in u p o n t h e m f r o m every quarter. . . . A n d all those w h o had been f a i t h f u l and honest hearted, being now firmly established in the increasing work of God, were led in their travel to see a n d feel the necessity of b e i n g gathered into a more u n i t e d body, for the benefit of greater protection, a n d a f u r t h e r increase of their spiritual travel. . . . T o constitute a true church of Christ, there must necessarily be a u n i o n of faith, of motives and of interest, in all the members who compose it. T h e r e must be " o n e body and one b r e a d : " 8 a n d n o t h i n g short of this u n i o n in all things, b o t h spiritual a n d temporal, can constitute a true church, which s 1 Cor. x. 17. [Footnote in original.]

26

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

is the body of Christ. And wherever that united body exists, it will bring into operation every individual talent for the general good of the whole body. . . . In this united capacity, the strength of the whole body becomes the strength of each member; and being united in the one Spirit of Christ, they have a greater privilege to serve God than they possibly could have in a separate capacity, and are better able to be mutual helps to each other; and they also find a greater degree of protection from the snares of a selfish and worldly nature. . . . T h e first step was to gather the believers into a body, where they could enjoy all things in common, both of a spiritual and temporal kind, and in which their temporal interest could be united together, and be consecrated to religious purposes. . . . T h e gathering of the society began at New-Lebanon, in the month of September, 1787, and continued to progress as fast as circumstances and the nature of the work would admit. Elders and deacons were appointed to lead and direct in matters of spiritual and temporal concern; suitable buildings were erected for the accommodation of the members; and order and regularity were, by degrees, established in the society: so that by the year 1792, the Church was considered as established in the principles of her present order and spirit of government. Those who were thus gathered into a united body, were denominated The Church; being a collective body of christians separated from the world, and enjoying, in their united capacity, one common interest. 9 T h e Moravians and the Shakers illustrate the process that was repeated time after time in America in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries. T h e N e w World offered hospitality to the peculiar religious doctrines that predisposed a sect to communitarianism. At the same time it confronted such sects with social pressures of one sort or another that transformed these communitive tendencies from potentiality to actuality. T h e process, often repeated, gradually generated a communitarian tradition. Chronologically, communitarian hisur.y in America began 10 in » [Calvin Green and Seth Y. Wells], A Summary View of the Millennial Church, or United Society of Believers, (Commonly Called Shakers.) . . . Published by Order of the Ministry, in Union with the Church (Albany, 1823), pp. 14-16, 23-24, 51-52. T h e Bibliographical Essay has a section on the extensive literature by and concerning the Shakers; see below, pp. 297-300. io Though sometimes discussed as a communitarian experiment, the settlement of the Pilgrims at Plymouth in 1620 is correctly described as a "common-fund-anddeferred-profit system." Charles M. Andrews, The Colonial Period of American History: The Settlements, I (New Haven, 1931), 265, see also pp. 123-26. William Bradford, it is true, regarded its experience as proof of the "vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth, would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God." History of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-16-17 (2 vols., Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society, 1912), I, 301-2. Bradford's reference to the applause of "some of later times" indicates that the Pilgrims were aware of the radical economic doctrines that were abroad in Holland and England, but not that they accepted them. T h e Jesuit reducciones

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

27

July 1663 with the arrival at the mouth of the Hoorn Kill, on the South (or Delaware) River, of a party of Dutch Mennonites under the leadership of Pieter Corneliszoon Plockhoy. T h e colony was the product of an interesting cross-fertilization of ideas between the radical sectarianism of the Low Countries and of England. Plockhoy, a native of Zierikzee, on the island of Schouven in the Netherlands, had gone to England in the latter days of the Protectorate. In 1659, ten years after the uprising of the Diggers under Winstanley, the Netherlander published two pamphlets, the second of which outlined a completely communitarian plan: A Way Propounded to Make the Poor in These and Other Nations Happy, by Bringing Together a Fit, Suitable and Well Qualified People unto One HousholdGovernment, or Little-Common-Wealth.'11 By 1659, however, the tide in England had turned against such reforms. Back in his native land after the English Restoration, Plockhoy on J u n e 9, 1662, obtained from the Burgomasters and Regents of Amsterdam a contract to establish a colony of Mennonites in New Netherlands. 12 He invited settlers by means of a new pamphlet, Kort en klaer Ontwerp (Amsterdam, 1662), 13 and the colony sailed in May 1663. T h e settlement they established at what is now Lewes, Delaware, enjoyed only a year of peaceful life, however, for in 1664 the English conquered New Netherlands and in the process plundered "what belonged to the Quaking Society of Plockhoy to a very naile." T h e colony that inaugurated communitarianism in America was obliterated too soon to influence the later history of the movement. T h e first communitarian colony that achieved any degree of permanence within the limits of what is now the United States was in Paraguay, founded in the early seventeenth century, did not influence the communitarian movement in what is now the United States and will not be discussed in this study. n T h e author's name is given on the title page as Peter Cornelius, Van-ZurikZee. T h e original London edition of 1659 has been reprinted by John Downie in his Peter Cornelius Plockboy [sic], Pioneer of the First Co-operative Commonwealth (Manchester [England]: Co-operative Union, n.d.). 1 2 T h e contract is printed in translation in E. B. O'Callaghan, ed., Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New-York ([1st series], 11 vols., Albany, 1856-61), II, 176-77; see also X I I , 429. T h e quotation concerning the destruction of Plockhoy's colony is from a report of 1684, ibid., Ill, 346. 13 In English, Short and Clear Plan, Serving as a Mutual Arrangement to Lighten the Labor, Unrest, and Difficulty of All Kinds of Handicraftsmen by the Establishment of a Mutual Company or Colony . . . on the South River in New Netherlands. T h e pamphlet is summarized and its title page reproduced in facsimile by Samuel Whitaker Pennypacker, " T h e Settlement of Germantown, Pennsylvania," Pennsylvania-German Society, Proceedings and Addresses, I X (1898), 229-63, whose account of Plockhoy leans heavily upon the earlier study by H. P. G. Quack, incorporated in his De Socialisten: Personen en Stelsels (3. Druk, 6 vols., Amsterdam, 1899-1901), I, 185-207.

28

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

established a score of years later. Its members came from the same center of religious and social radicalism as did Plockhoy—that is, the Netherlands and the adjoining lands of northwestern Germany. T h e y were followers of J e a n de Labadie, preacher of a mystical Protestantism, whose labors, begun at Geneva, were most extensive in the Netherlands. At Amsterdam about 1668 Labadie first developed his communitarian doctrines, and these were practised not only in that place, but in several subsequent communities of Labadists, such as those at Altona near Hamburg (where Labadie himself died in 1674), and at Wieuwerd in Friesland, in the Netherlands. From the latter place two emissaries were sent to America in 1679 to obtain land for a branch of the society, and in 1683 this project eventuated in a communitarian settlement of Labadists at Bohemia Manor on Chesapeake Bay, in what is now Cecil County, Maryland. 1 4 T h e Labadist colony was authoritarian in its organization, and was closely enough connected with its parent community at Wieuwerd to share its declining fortunes. By 1698 a division within the group at Bohemia Manor foretold the end, though this was some years in coming. T h e dissolution of the Labadist experiment marked the end of Dutch and north German influence upon American communitism. T h e later waves of communitarian migration to America had their sources in southern and eastern Germany. As time went on, moreover, the sects were less closely connected with existing organizations in Europe, and their communitarian institutions were more definitely the product of American conditions. A decade after the Labadists, a sectarian group from Wurtemberg and neighboring states set out for America under the leadership of J o h a n n J a c o b Zimmermann, a native of Vaihingen near Stuttgart and a teacher at the universities of T ü b i n g e n and Heidelberg. Leadership passed, after Zimmermann's death on the eve of departure, to J o h a n n Kelpius, from the University of Altdorf in Bavaria, who had become acquainted with Zimmermann in Nürnberg. T h e newcomers first visited the Labadists at Bohemia Manor, but soon went on to Pennsylvania, where Quakerism seemed to possess something in common 15 with their own mystical doctrines, derived from the Rosicrucians and from J a c o b Böhme. Settling in Germantown, 14 T h e standard monograph is Bartlett B. James, The Labadist Colony in Maryland (Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, vol. XVII, no. 6; Baltimore, 1899), whose author later re-edited the principal source relating to the preliminary Labadist expedition to spy out the land, Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 1679-1680, ed. by B. B. James and J . Franklin Jameson (Original Narratives of Early American History; New York, 1913). is On this point see Oswald Seidensticker, "William Penn's Travels in Holland and Germany in 1677," Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, II (1878), 246-47.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

29

Pennsylvania, Kelpius founded in 1694 a community, usually called the Society of the Woman in the Wilderness, on a ridge of land overlooking Wissahickon Creek, within the present boundaries of Fairmount Park. T h e community hardly survived the death of Kelpius in 1708, but its mystical ideas permeated other sects, and it had its own communitarian offshoots, such as Irenia, or the T r u e Church of Philadelphia or Brotherly Love, founded by Henry Bernhard Kôster at near-by Plymouth about 1697.16 T h e first community to enjoy a significant span of life was that at Ephrata, Pennsylvania, founded in 1732 by Johann Conrad Beissel. T h e founder was born at Eberbach in the Palatinate, a short distance above Heidelberg, on the Neckar. During young manhood he lived in various parts of southern Germany, including Heidelberg itself. He was deeply imbued with the Pietism of the region, and he seems to have had some contact with several of the sects that had betrayed, or were later to reveal, communitarian tendencies: with the Inspirationists, who founded the nineteenth-century community of Amana in the United States, with the disciples of Jacob Bôhme, among whom the founders of the Woman in the Wilderness had been numbered, with the Anabaptists, perhaps even with the Labadists. Migrating to America in 1720, Beissel became acquainted with the dwindling remnant of the Society of the Woman in the Wilderness, and apparently visited the Labadist community in Maryland. 17 T h e ascetic life which Beissel preached and lived in America culminated in 1732 in his withdrawal to the banks of the Cocalico Creek in Lancaster County, where in the succeeding years his followers gathered about him in the community which they called Ephrata. Its austerity of life—manifest even today in the buildings that have survived—caused Ephrata to be referred to as the Cloister, and its fame to reach even the pages of Voltaire's Dictionnaire philosophique.1* As settlement pushed farther west in Pennsylvania, across the 16 See Julius F. Sachse, The German Pietists of Provincial Pennsylvania, 16941708 (Philadelphia, 1895), passim; and S. W. Pennypacker, " T h e Settlement of Germantown," op. cit., pp. 261-85. T w o important manuscripts, dealing principally with Kelpius' voyage to America, have been published: Oswald Seidensticker, translator and ed., " T h e Hermits of the Wissahickon," Pennsylvania Magazine of History, XI (1887), 427—11; and The Diarium of Magister Johannes Kelpius, translated and ed. by J. F. Sachse (Pennsylvania-German Society, Proceedings and Addresses, XXV [for 1914]; Lancaster, Pa., 1917). For additional references see Emil Meynen, compiler, Bibliography on German Settlement in Colonial North America (Leipzig, 1937), p. 90. 17 See Walter C. Klein, Johann Conrad Beissel, Mystic and Martinet, 1690-1768 (Philadelphia, 1942), pp. 15, 20-33, 40-43. See also the section on Ephrata in the Bibliographical Essay. is Article "Église," in Voltaire, Oeuvres complètes, XVIII (Paris, 1878), 501.

30

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

Susquehanna and into the Cumberland Valley, converts were made by these German Seventh Day Baptists. One special group, along the East Branch of the Little Antietam Creek near what is now Waynesboro, Franklin County, Pennsylvania, came under the wing of Ephrata, from whom a pastor was sent to them. Toward the end of the eighteenth century these sectarians gathered into a community similar to Ephrata. From the donor of the land, Andreas Schneeberger, it derived its name, the Seventh Day Baptist Church at Snow Hill, or, more commonly, the Snow Hill Nunnery. 19 Expansionist forces in the Ephrata Community were feeble, however, as compared with the missionary ardor that imbued the Moravians. T h e migration of the Unitas Fratrum was part of a general dispersion from Europe which, between 1732 and 1736, carried the Moravians not only to North America, but also to the West Indies and South America, to Greenland, and to South Africa. Their zeal to convert the Indians was in marked contrast with the apathy of most Protestant denominations, and the small band of Moravian missionaries played a role not unlike that of the Jesuits in penetrating the Indian frontier of the eighteenth century. T h e immediate result of their expansionist ardor was the widest diffusion that communitarian ideas had yet enjoyed. I n 1736, only four years after Beissel took u p his abode at Ephrata, the Moravians worked out their first communitarian arrangements in America in their settlement on the Savannah River in Georgia. 20 They established their permanent community at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1741, and by the end of 1744 had elaborated the General Economy already described. This was promptly duplicated, not only at Nazareth, Pennsylvania, in 1744, but at the later settlements at Wachovia in North Carolina in 1753, and at Lititz in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, in 1754. T h o u g h the General Economy was dissolved in 1762, it had spread over a wider area than any previous communitarian enterprise in America. 21 T h e foreign-language sects lived a life apart. Their communitarianism, indeed, was partly designed to secure isolation from contacts that might dilute and weaken the religious zeal that had brought is See J. F. Sachse, The German Sectarians of Pennsylvania, vol. II, 1742-1800 (Philadelphia, 1900), pp. 360-71; and Anonymous, History of Franklin County, Pennsylvania (Chicago, 1887), pp. 535, 614. T h e date of beginning is somewhat vague. A large stone house was built as early as 1793, but a later structure of 1814 is described by Sachse as "the first community house." P. 366. 20 See Fries, Moravians in Georgia, pp. 135-37. In the same year, 1736, a group of Moravians visited Ephrata. Corliss F. Randolph, "The German Seventh-Day Baptists," in Seventh Day Baptist General Conference, Seventh Day Baptists in Europe and America (2 vols., Plainfield, N.J., 1910), II, 1009, 1031, 1036. 21 See Sessler, Communal Pietism among Early American Moravians, pp. 17, 19, 20, 72-85, 186-87, 193-98.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

31

them to America. Community life acted to preserve the mother tongue, and that too was useful in safeguarding the linguistic foundations of the faith. T h e barrier of language, however, affected not only incoming influences, but outgoing ones as well. Though the sectarian communities might eventually win the favorable opinion of their neighbors through the earnestness of their faith and the prosperousness of their affairs, their influence upon the life and thought of the American people in the eighteenth century was inconsiderable. Only with the Shakers did communitarianism make a real impact upon American opinion at large. From the time of their coming in 1774, no barrier of language separated these English sectarians from their new neighbors. Persecution was quickly visited upon Mother Ann Lee and her followers, but this was at least a positive reaction, indicating (as indifference would never have done) that the new sect was making its impression. T h e missionary journey that Ann Lee and the elders of her church made through Massachusetts and Connecticut in the years 1781-83 was a momentous event in the history of communitarianism. American converts quickly outnumbered the original immigrants, for the first time in the history of such sects. T h e groups of believers that were won to the new faith in the various towns of New England therefore constituted the very first communitarian colonies of native-born, English-speaking Americans. Americanization of the Shaker sect proceeded rapidly. After Ann Lee's death in 1784, she was succeeded as head of the sect by James Whittaker, one of her original English followers. But when he died in 1787, leadership passed permanently into American hands, control being shared by Joseph Meacham and Lucy Wright, natives of Enfield, Connecticut, and Pittsfield, Massachusetts, respectively. 22 In less than fifteen years a small revivalistic band of dissenters in Manchester, England, had transferred their activities to the New World and had become a fully Americanized and growing sect. T h e evolution, already described, of communitarian institutions within the sect paralleled its transformation into an American body. T h e first organization of the Shakers upon a fully communistic basis was effected at Mount Lebanon, or New Lebanon, in Columbia County, New York, in 1787. T h i s community accordingly became, in Shaker phraseology, the "Mother-Church" or "the center of union to all the other societies." 2 3 T h e original settlement, however, had been at Niskeyuna or Watervliet, in Albany County, and the members there were gathered in "gospel order" the next year. T h e con22 See Testimonies of the Life, Character, Revelations and Doctrines of Mother Ann Lee, and the Elders with Her, . . . Collected from Living Witnesses, in Union with the Church (2d ed„ Albany, 1888), pp. 64-144; Youngs, Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing (4th ed., Albany, 1856), pp. 628-29. 23 Green and Wells, Summary View of the Millennial Church (1823), pp. 68, 60.

32

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

verts scattered throughout New England were prompt to adopt the new communitarian pattern from Mount Lebanon, and nine additional communities were formed in the early 1790's. Two were just across the state line from Mount Lebanon, at Hancock and Tyringham, Massachusetts. One was in the Connecticut Valley at Enfield, Connecticut. Two others were in eastern Massachusetts, some thirty miles from Boston, at Harvard and Shirley. Another two were in New Hampshire, at Canterbury not far from Concord, and at Enfield near Dartmouth College. A final group were in the District of Maine. Two of these, at Alfred and at Sabbathday Lake or New Gloucester, were enduring; 2 4 the third, at Gorham, was quickly merged into the others.- 0 T h e Second Great Awakening, which got under way at the turn of the century, offered the Shakers an opportunity in the west, of which they quickly took advantage. Hearing of the great revival in Kentucky, the church at Mount Lebanon sent three missionaries to Kentucky and Ohio in 1805. Their preaching bore fruit in the founding of five new communities before the end of the decade. T h e first two were in Ohio, at Union Village in Warren County, some thirty miles from Cincinnati, and at Watervliet near Dayton. T w o others were in Kentucky, at South Union or Gasper Springs in Logan County, and at Pleasant Hill, seven miles east of Harrodsburg. T h e farthest west which Shaker settlement reached was Indiana, where the community called West Union was established on Busseron Creek near the Wabash, sixteen miles above Vincennes.- 6 T h e last wave of expansion began in 1817, with the founding of a short-lived village at Savoy, Massachusetts. 27 T h e new enthusiasm lasted at least a decade. During this time two more communities were founded in Ohio, at North Union in what is now the Shaker Heights suburb of Cleveland, and at Whitewater in Hamilton County, a score of miles from Cincinnati. One more was founded in New York, locating first at Sodus Bay on Lake Ontario, and migrating ten years later to Groveland or Sonyea in near-by Livingston County. 28 No other expansion in the number of Shaker communities occurred T h e s e were the eleven earliest communities as listed in the first official Shaker histories: Youngs, Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing (2d ed., Albany, 1810), p. 509; and Green and Wells, Summary View of the Millennial Church (1823), pp. 68-69. For the exact location and date of f o u n d i n g of the various communities, see the Checklist of Communitarian Experiments, constituting the appendix to the present work. -5 Anna White and Leila S. Taylor, Shakerism: Its Meaning and Message (Columbus, O., 1901), p. 95. Because the merger had already occurred, the Gorham community was not listed in the works cited in the preceding footnote. 26 Green and Wells, Summary View of the Millennial Church (1823), p. 75. 27 Ibid., pp. 137-38. 28 ibid. (2d ed., Albany, 1848), p. 84 n.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

33

thereafter, except for the establishment of branches in Georgia and Florida in the 1880's and 1890's. 29 I n carrying communitarian ideas to the American people generally, the Shakers were more influential than all their sectarian predecessors combined. T h e establishment of their first full-fledged community in 1787 made that date as memorable in the microcosmic history of communitarianism as it is in the broader annals of the republic. In view of the regularity with which they organized the institutions of communitive life and set them forth in writing, and in view of the skill with which they provided for the westward expansion of those institutions, it is perhaps not too far-fetched to say that they were the makers of both the Constitution and the Northwest Ordinance of the communitarian movement. T h e rapid expansion of the Shakers is not attributable solely to their own exertion. T h e scattered communitarian efforts of more than a century had at last begun to show a cumulative effect. By the final quarter of the eighteenth century small groups of native-born Americans were revealing the influence of such ideas. Contemporary with the rise of the Shakers was the development of certain other communitarian sects in America, significant not because of their numbers, but because they revealed a native communitarian tradition struggling into existence. Most famous of these enterprises was the community of Jerusalem, which the prophetess J e m i m a Wilkinson, self-styled "Public Universal Friend," established in what is now Yates County in central New York in 1788, a year after the Shakers finally adopted communism farther to the east. Possessed of a Quaker background, J e m i m a Wilkinson was influenced by the New-Light Baptists in 1774, 30 but probably not directly by the newly arrived Shakers. Her 2 9 On the White Oak colony in Camden County, Ga., sec Alexander Kent, "Cooperative Communities in the United States," Bulletin of the Department of Labor, vol. VI, no. 35, p. 565 (July 1901); Federal Writers' Project, Georgia: A Guide to Its Towns and Countryside (American Guide Series; Athens, Ga., 1940), p. 289; and White and Taylor, Shakerism, pp. 213-14. On the colony at Narcoossee, Osceola County, Fla., see The Manifesto, Published by the Shakers, X X V I I , 92, 141 (June, Sept., 1897), which precisely dates the founding as 1894. 3 ° See David Hudson, History of Jemima Wilkinson, a Preacheress of the Eighteenth Century (Geneva, N.Y., 1821), p. 15. Robert P. St. J o h n discusses Jemima Wilkinson and Ann Lee as manifestations of the same contemporary religious enthusiasm, hut does not cite any direct connections between them. See his " ( e m i m a Wilkinson," New York State Historical Association, Proceedings, X X V I I I , 158-75 (April 1930), especially pp. 158-60. St. John provides an extensive bibliography with critical evaluations, thus making further discussion of the printed sources unnecessary here. Manuscripts in private hands are noted by him, and also in Journal of American History, I X , 263 (April-June 1915). In addition, a large collection has recently been acquired by the Collection of Regional History at Cornell University. See Mississippi Valley Historical Review, X X X I I I , 519 (Dec. 1946).

34

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

career in New England and in Philadelphia had given her a notoriety that brought distinguished visitors to her community, among them the Duke of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, who described both her and the Shakers. 31 No such glare of publicity surrounded the other communitarian groups—likewise with New England antecedents—who were her contemporaries, but whose histories are exceedingly obscure. Earliest were the Dorrilites, who in 1797 and 1798 adopted communitarian institutions in adjoining neighborhoods on either side of the Massachusetts-Vermont line. 32 Half a dozen years later a shoemaker named William Bullard led a group of Vermonters across the boundary into New York State, where from 1804 until 1810 they lived in a cooperative colony called "The Union," at Clark's Crossing, two miles north of Potsdam, between that town and Norwood. 33 In the next decade another Bullard, with the given name of Isaac, captained a group of so-called Pilgrims, who wandered into Vermont from Lower Canada, lived a life of theocratic communism for a time about 1817 at South Woodstock, and then started on farther journeyings that brought them into contact with the Shakers and took them eventually beyond the Mississippi. More important than the spontaneous formation of these shortlived groups in the eastern states was the spread of communitarianism into the expanding west. Contemporary with the success of the Shakers in Kentucky in 1805 was the first crossing of the Appalachians by a German communitarian sect. This was the Harmony Society, According to New York History, XXII, 248 (April 1941), a book on Jemima Wilkinson is being written by Mrs. Walter A. Henricks and Arnold J. Potter, who jointly contributed an article to the same journal, " T h e Universal Friend: Jemima Wilkinson," XXIII, 159-65 (April 1942). Francois Alexandre Frederic, Due de La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, Travels through the United. States of North America . . . in the Years 1795, 1796, and 1797 (2 vols., London, 1799), I, 110-18, 389-94. 32 T h e Dorrilites and the Pilgrims (discussed below) are described by Zadock Thompson, History of Vermont, Natural, Civil and Statistical (Burlington, 1853), II, 202-4; and by David M. L u d l u m , Social Ferment in Vermont, 1791-1850 (Columbia Studies in American Culture, V; New York, 1939), pp. 239-40, 242-44. T o the contemporary references on the Pilgrims cited by L u d l u m should be added: T h o m a s Nuttall, Journal of Travels into the Arkansa Territory during the Year Travels, 1819 (1821), as reprinted in Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed., Early Western 1748-1846 (32 vols., Cleveland, 1904-7), XIII, 294-95; and T i m o t h y Flint, Recollections of the Last Ten Years, Passed in Occasional Residences and Journeyings in the Valley of the Mississippi (Boston, 1826), pp. 275-80. Flint's is the most comprehensive account, and mentions the Pilgrims' relations with the Shakers. 33 Richard C. Ellsworth, " N o r t h e r n New York's Early Co-operative Union," New York State Historical Association, Proceedings, XXVII, 328-32 (Oct. 1929). T h e buildings are reported to be still standing. See Watertown Daily Times, Sept. 13, 1934.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

35

which had migrated from southern Germany under the leadership of Father George Rapp, a Wurtemberger, and which settled in 1805 at Harmony in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, at the head of the Ohio Valley. T h e westward impulse that h a d carried them so far soon carried them farther, and in 1814 they established a new community of Harmonie on the banks of the Wabash in Posey County, Indiana. But the impulse had overshot its mark. T h o u g h successful in Indiana, the Rappites felt they had been unwise in venturing so far. I n 182425, accordingly, they sold their property to Robert Owen, thus coming into direct contact with the opening phases of secular communitarianism in America. T h e i r final migration to Economy, Pennsylvania, took them back to within fifteen miles of their original home, b u t at a more strategic location on the banks of the Ohio River, some eighteen miles below Pittsburgh. So located, their communal life attracted the notice—and sometimes influenced the opinions—of numerous westward-moving settlers, foreign travelers, and nativeborn social theorists. So well known did the Rappites become that as early as 1824 Byron was satirizing them in Don Juan.3* But fame brought misfortune also. Rival communitarian leaders, as well as travelers and poets, learned of the prosperous community at Economy. T h e second-adventist beliefs of the Rappites made them hospitable to a certain Bernhard Mueller, who, calling himself Count Leon, proclaimed that he was divinely sent to usher in the millennium. Coming direct from Germany, he wintered at Economy in 1831-32 and won many of the Harmonists to his leadership. Internal dissension came to a head in the spring of 1832, and 176 members of Economy went with Count Leon to f o u n d a schismatic community, which they called the New Philadelphia Society, at Phillipsburg (now Monaca), Pennsylvania, some ten miles downstream from Economy on the Ohio River. T h o u g h the original Harmony Society was forced to turn over a substantial part of its assets to the seceders, the success of the new colony was not thereby assured. In September 1833, Count Leon and his followers voyaged down the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, and in 1834 founded a new communitarian settlement at Grand Ecore in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana. T w o years later, after Count Leon's death, the community moved sixty-five miles north to Germantown in the same state. 35 " C a n t o 15, stanzas 35-36. Among the travelers before 1840 who described the Rappites at Economy were Karl Bernhard, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (in 1825-26), Mrs. Basil Hall (1828), Charles Augustus Murray (1834-36), Harriet Martineau (1834-36), and James Silk Buckingham (1836^1). Titles and page references are given in other footnotes, which may be located through the Index. See also the Bibliographical Essay. 35 See Karl J. R. Arndt, "The Genesis of Germantown, Louisiana: or T h e Mysterious Past of Louisiana's Mystic, Count de Leon," Louisiana Historical Quarterly,

36

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

By this time the westward movement was in full swing. A dozen years after the coming of the Rappites, a second group from Wurtemberg carried their sectarian ideas beyond the mountains. Under the leadership of Joseph Baumler (who later anglicized his name to Bimeler), this group purchased land in Tuscarawas County, Ohio, in 1817. T w o years later they organized themselves on a communistic basis as the Society of Separatists of Zoar. It was the members, rather than the leader, who, after a brief experience of American conditions, insisted upon community of property rather than a division of the lands as originally intended. In this decision equalitarian religious doctrines played a conspicuous part. 3 6 T h u s for a century and a half, from Plockhoy to Bimeler, the communitive movement developed in America under exclusively sectarian auspices. T h a t the idea might eventually appeal to nonreligious, or at least nonsectarian, reformers was indicated by two enterprises that were projected in the eighteenth century but failed of realization. T h e first was sponsored by a well-educated immigrant from Saxony named Christian Priber, who about 1736 went among the Cherokees in the southern Appalachians, learned their language, protected them from white exploitation, and finally planned a completely communistic society which he called "Paradise." Priber's plan had its roots in the ideas of Plato and More, not in religious sectarianism. In 1743 Priber, accused by British colonial authorities of aiding the French, was arrested and thrown into prison, where he died, his project unrealized. 37 T h e humanitarian impulse of the Enlightenment did not exhaust itself with Priber. Half a century later other plans for emigrant colonies were in the air. In 1788, for example, J . P. Brissot de Warville, future leader of the Girondists in the French Revolution, visited America, in part to find a site for a model republic that M. Claviere was advocating. When Joseph Priestley, the English scientist, moved to Northumberland at the forks of the Susquehanna in PennX X I V , 3 7 8 - 4 3 3 (April 1941); and idem, " T h e Life and Mission of Count L e o n , " American-German Revieic, vol. VI, no. 5. pp. 5 - 8 , 3 0 - 3 7 ; no. 6, pp. 15-19 ( J u n e , Aug. 1940). Based on Louisiana records, these articles present a more favorable view of Count Leon than the narratives written from R a p p i t e sources, which treat him, naturally enough, as a complete impostor. See Aaron Williams, The Harmony Society at Economy, Penn'a. founded by George Rapp (Pittsburgh, 1866), pp. 7 2 - 8 1 , 131-37; Bole, Harmony Society, pp. 121-20; and Duss, The Harmonists, pp. 7 9 - 9 0 . 3« George B. I.andis, "Separatists of / o a r , " American Historical Association, Annual Report, 1S98, p. 171. See also the Bibliographical Essay. See Verner W. Crane, " A Lost Utopia of the l i r s t American F r o n t i e r , " Sewanee Review, X X V I I , 18-61 (Jan. 1919). and the same author's sketch of Priber in Dictionary of American Biography (20 vols., New York, 1928-36), X V , 210, where the principal sources are listed.

COMMUNITIVE SECTS

37

sylvania in 1794, it was with the hope of establishing there, in conjunction with T h o m a s Cooper, "a large settlement for the friends of liberty." Neither project was strictly communitarian, but together they influenced a proposal that was: the plan for a so-called "Pantisocracy," which Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Robert Southey, and others discussed in 1794. In Coleridge's words, "a small b u t liberalized party have formed a scheme of emigration on the principles of an abolition of individual property." T h e site chosen was on the Susquehanna, near Cooper and Priestley, b u t the plan fell through before any substantial steps had been taken. 38 T h o u g h the nonsectarian plans of Priber and of Southey and Coleridge came to nought, the way was being prepared for purely secular forms of communitarian experiment. These reached the stage of actuality in 1825 when Robert Owen established his New Harmony Community in the old village of the Rappites on the Wabash River in southern Indiana. T h e date was epochal, for with Owen the communitarian movement in America came at last to stand on its own feet as an independent system of social thought, not a mere corollary of theological doctrine. Owen's accomplishment depended on the contributions that the sectarian communities had been making through more than a century and a half of effort. It depended, also, u p o n a transformation that was occurring during the early part of the nineteenth century in the thought of the sects themselves. T h i s was the gradual secularization of the communitarian ideal among the very groups that had originally deduced it from religious postulates. 38 T h e principal source materials bearing upon Pantisocracy are in the published correspondence of Coleridge and Southey; and the project is described in virtually all their biographies. Three recent articles describe the scheme and investigate its relationship to earlier plans of migration, such as those of Brissot, Cooper, and Priestley: Maurice W. Kclley, "Thomas Cooper and Pantisocracy," Modern Language Notes, XLV, 218-20 (April 1930); Sister Eugenia, "Coleridge's Scheme of Pantisocracy and American Travel Accounts," Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, XLV, 1069-84 (Dec. 1930); J. R. MacGillivray, "The Pantisocracy Scheme and Its Immediate Background," in Malcolm W. Wallace, ed., Studies in English by Members of University College, Toronto (Toronto, 1931), pp. 131-69. T h e statements of Priestley and Coleridge are quoted from MacGillivray, pp. 154, 165.

Chapter III TRANSMITTING THE COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION TO THE NINETEENTH CENTURY IN AMERICA, and America alone, the religious socialism of the seventeenth century evolved without break into the secular socialism of the nineteenth. T h e communitarian sects were the links in this chain of continuity. T h e inspiration they drew from the Reformation and the Christian tradition in general, they passed on as a living force to the nineteenth-century leaders of social reform in the United States. In Europe, by contrast, there was a definite hiatus. T h e rationalism of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment constituted a complete interruption, and the reactionary role played by the established churches engendered a far more militant anticlericalism among European reformers than among American. As a result, no genuinely formative intellectual relationship can be traced in Europe between the religious reformers of the earlier period and the outspokenly secular founders of modern socialism. Thus, Charles Fourier called the Quakers and Anabaptists "political abortions," 1 and regarded religious innovation in general as a source of discord to be charmed away by promises of quadrupled income. 2 Robert Owen discovered the communitive ideas of the seventeenth-century English sects only after he had formulated his own proposals. 3 Karl Marx's omnivorous reading included virtually nothing on the history of religious movements. 4 His colleague, Friedrich Engels, ridiculed the "very absurd and irrational opinions" of the communitarian sects, and remarked that if communism could Fourier, Quatre Mouvements (1808), 283 n. - See Fourier, La Fausse Industrie (2 vols., Paris, 1835-36), II, 457-6 [sic]. In these erratically paged volumes, this is the sixth of a group of pages that follow p. 820, but bear the numbers 4 5 7 - i , 457-2, etc. 3 Francis Place first called Owen's attention to John Bellers' Proposals for Raising a Colledge of Industry (London, 1696), remarking, " I have made a great discovery—of a work advocating your social views a century and a half ago." Owen, Life . . . Written by Himself, I, 240. Owen reprinted the pamphlet in his New View of Society: Tracts Relative to This Subject (London, 1818), and in his Life, I.A, 155-81. < See the elaborate index to books mentioned in the correspondence between Marx and Engels from 1844 to 1883. Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, I I I . Abteilung, IV, 593-612. 1

38

TRANSMITTING COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION

39

be successfully practised by them, "how much sooner must it be feasible for others who are free from such insanities." 5 Even the Christian Socialists owed little to the older radical sectarians, 6 however freely they might draw upon the same ultimate gospel sources. At the very end of the nineteenth century, it is true, socialist historians began to eye the sectarian reformers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries with approval and to claim them as forebears. 7 But this was too belated a gesture to be taken seriously as evidence of intellectual indebtedness, however useful it might be to the European movement in furnishing a coat of arms and a family tree. In the United States, however, the older religious socialism retained its vitality throughout most of the nineteenth century. It existed side by side with, and influenced the development of, the newer nonreligious varieties of socialist thought. In point of fact, the communitarian tradition of the sects was not superseded but only secularized. Consequently in America religious radicalism played a real part in creating modern socialism. T h e communitive sects not only provided continuity with the religious past, they also participated in the process of secularization. For these reasons they occupy a unique place in the intellectual history, not merely of the United States, but of the modern world as a whole. By the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century the sects had accomplished their pioneer task. Continuing interrelations had drawn together the apparently scattered efforts of the Germans into a more or less unified tradition. T h a t tradition had been translated into American terms by the Shakers. Under the leadership of both groups the new west had been invaded. And older regions had felt the influence of the movement sufficiently to produce native communitarian sects of their own. s Engels, "Beschreibung der in neueren Zeit entstandenen und noch bestehenden kommunistischen Ansiedlungen," Deutsches Biirgerbuch fur 1845, reprinted in Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, I. Abt., IV, 352. 6 Fairly conclusive on this point is the silence of Charles E. Raven, Christian Socialism, 1848-1854 (London, 1920), and James Dombrowski, The Early Days of Christian Socialism in America (New York, 1936). ? This interpretation was first presented on a comprehensive scale in the collective work edited by Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky, Die Geschichte des Socialismus in Einzeldarstellungen (3 vols, [numbered I and III, the former being in 2 parts], Stuttgart, 1895-98), sections of which have been published in translation as separate works: Kautsky, Communism in Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation (London, 1897), and Bernstein, Cromwell ir Communism (London, 1930). T h e same approach characterizes the subsequent writings of E. Belfort Bax and Max Beer, and, most recently, David W. Petegorsky, Left-]Ving Democracy in the English Civil War (London, 1940). For a scholarly criticism of this type of interpretation, see Winthrop S. Hudson, "Economic and Social Thought of Gerrard Winstanley—Was He a Seventeenth Century Marxist?" Journal of Modem History, XVIII, 1-21 (March 1946).

40

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

T h i s success was accompanied by a subtle but important change of emphasis. In 1825, when the followers of Father Rapp established the third of their villages, they called it not Harmony, as on both previous occasions, but Economy. 8 T h e choice of name was symbolic of what was happening in most of the religious communities. T h e economic and social implications of their way of life were thrusting theological concepts into the background, and the colonists were beginning to think of themselves as communitarians first and sectarians afterwards. T h i s reversal of emphasis is clearly evident in the literature of the Shakers. T h e first substantial work expounding Shaker principles, The Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing, often referred to as the "Shaker Bible," was published in 1808. Its introduction was pure theology, opening with the statement: "Whatever degree of natural wisdom may be attained by those who are without Christ . . . , the only true saving knowledge of God . . . is by and through the revelation of Jesus Christ." Not until the seventh of the eight parts into which the work was divided did the authors embark upon a description of their Church Covenant, by which "the whole body of Believers was placed in distinct societies or communities" and "possessed all things jointly." 9 Fifteen years later, in 1823, the Shakers issued A Summary View of the Millennial Church. Beginning with history rather than theology, the authors reached the subject of Shaker communism at the opening of the second main division of their seven-part book. 1 0 And after another quarter-century had elapsed, the Shakers were ready to give their social and economic arrangements absolute priority in the literature they prepared for outsiders. When a second edition of A Summary View was called for in 1848, it was prefaced by a new section entitled "Introductory Remarks: Comprising a Short Review of the Formation of Associations and Communities," which began: T h e present age of the world is an age of wonders. T h e most extraordinary changes, revolutions a n d r e m a r k a b l e events are rapidly rolling on, through the physical, political, m o r a l a n d religious world, that were ever known on earth. . . . B u t a m o n g all the hopeful expectations, labors a n d desires of m a n k i n d , in the present age, n o n e a p p e a r m o r e evident than those which lead to the f o r m a t i o n of associations in which all the m e m b e r s can 8 Looking back upon the alteration in name, one of the later members felt that it had indicated "a slight but fundamental shifting in the subconscious ideals of the Society." Duss, The Harmonists (1943), p. 64. 9 Youngs, Testimony of Christ's Second Appearing (2d ed., Albany, 1810) pp xxi, 509. 10 Green and Wells, Summary View of the Millennial Church (1823), Part II, chap. I, "Formation of the Society into a United Body, Possessing a Consecrated Interest," pp. 51-58.

T R A N S M I T T I N G COMMUNITARIAN T R A D I T I O N

41

enjoy equal rights and privileges, physical and moral, both of a spiritual and temporal nature, in a united capacity. . . . The great inequality o£ rights and privileges which prevails so extensively throughout the world, is a striking evidence of the importance of a reformation of some kind. . . . During the present century, many attempts have been made to form associations upon the plan of a community of interest, in various parts of Europe and in the United States of America. Many societies have been formed in part or wholly upon this plan. But it is well known that with all their wisdom, skill, benevolent designs, unity of intention, convenience of location and confidence of success, they have soon failed in their expectations, and been scattered as before. . . . But notwithstanding these general failures, we are prepared to show that there is a sure system, founded upon the principles of a unity of interest in all things, which has stood the test a sufficient length of time, to prove that it can be attained and supported. . . . T h e United Society of Believers (called Shakers) was founded upon the principles of equal rights and privileges, with a united interest in all things, both spiritual and temporal, and has been maintained and supported in this Society, at New-Lebanon, about sixty years, without the least appearance of any failure. Is not this proof sufficient in favor of such a system? 11 As the Shakers gradually shifted their emphasis from theology to social reform in the forty years between 1808 and 1848, public interest in them became more widespread and more sympathetic. As might be expected, the earliest response they had evoked had been a hostile one. During the Revolutionary period, anti-British feeling had been capitalized by Valentine Rathbun in A Brief Account of a Religious Scheme Taught and Propagated by a Number of Europeans . . . Commonly Called Shaking Quakers. . . . The Whole Being a Discovery of the Wicked Machinations of the Principal Enemies of America (Boston, 1781). T h e same mood prevailed west of the Appalachians thirty years later when James Smith published Shakerism Detected: Their Erroneous and Treasonous Proceedings, and False Publications . . . Exposed to Public View (Paris, Kentucky, 1810). Anti-Shaker propaganda also took the form of personal narratives, such as A Brief Statement of the Sufferings of Mary Dyer, Occasioned by the Society Called Shakers, Written by Herself (Boston, 1818). 12 11 Green and Wells, Summary View of the Millennial Church (2d ed„ Albany, 1848), pp. 1-3. T h e substitution o£ a social for a theological emphasis permanently affected Shaker propaganda, as is shown by the titles of later nineteenth-century publications by their leading elder, Frederick William Evans, such as: Shaker Communism (London, 1871), Shaker Reconstruction of the American Government (Hudson [N.Y.], 1888), Capital and Labor (Mt. Lebanon [ca. 1890]), and A Shaker on Political and Social Reform (Mt. Lebanon, n.d.). See also Daniel Fraser, Analysis of Human Society, Declaring the Law Which Creates and Sustains a Community Having Goods in Common (Mt. Lebanon [ca. 1890]). 12 Mary M. Dyer became Mrs. Marshall, but continued her attacks as late as 1847, when she published The Rise and Progress of the Serpent from the Garden

42

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

T h i s flood of vituperation even led the New York legislature to consider hostile measures against the Shakers—a move which T h o m a s Jefferson denounced in 1817 as threatening to "carry us back to the times of the darkest bigotry a n d barbarism." 13 Before long, however, unreasoning opposition began to be supplanted by intelligent curiosity. Scholars were in the van of those who about 1820 began to give serious attention to the social institutions of the Shakers. Representatives of Yale were first, despite the religious conservatism of that institution. President T i m o t h y Dwight had observed the Shakers as early as 1799. H e returned several times to their villages, read books by a n d a b o u t them, and in his Travels in NewEngland and New-York, published posthumously in 1821 and 1822, devoted a score of pages to them—critical, of course, b u t wellinformed and never scurrilous. B e n j a m i n Silliman, professor of chemistry and n a t u r a l history at the same college, described the Shakers in his Remarks Made on a Short Tour between Hartford and Quebec in the Autumn of 1819, and thereafter returned several times to the subject, finally writing, in 1832, an entire volume on the Peculiarities of the Shakers.1* Interest soon spread f r o m the meridian of Yale College (whence all longitude was reckoned in the m a p accompanying President Dwight's Travels) to the eastern provinces. I n J a n u a r y 1823 Edward Everett, then professor of Greek at Harvard, published a long account of the Shakers in the North American Review. His article was remarkable for its shrewd, not to say cynical, analysis of the economic forces contributing to Shaker success. W i t h o u t denying the role of religious enthusiasm, Everett frankly assumed that the theological a n d ascetic beliefs of the sect were handicaps to its program, overcome in the minds of the new converts only by its economic attractiveness. "Whoever supposes," he wrote, "that where a good f a r m is thus of Eden to the Present Day, with a Disclosure of Shakerism (Concord, N.H., 1847). Other personal narratives of the same character were published by Eunice Chapman (Albany, 1817) and Abram Van Vleet (Lebanon, Ohio, 1818). In refutation of Dyer, Chapman, and Van Vleet the Shakers at U n i o n Village, Ohio, published a volume entitled The Other Side of the Question (Cincinnati, 1819). 13 Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, June 16, 1817, in Jefferson, Writings, ed. by A. A. Lipscomb and A. E. Bergh (20 vols., Washington, 1903-4), XV, 134. " T i m o t h y Dwight, Travels in New-England and New-York (4 vols., New Haven, 1821-22), III, 149-69; also (4 vols., London, 1823), III, 137-57; [Benjamin Silliman], Remarks Made on a Short Tour between Hartford and Quebec in the Autumn of 1819 ( N e w Haven, 1820), pp. 40-53; [Silliman], Peculiarities of the Shakers, Described in a Series of Letters from Lebanon Springs (New York, 1832). See also Thomas Brown and His Pretended History of Shakers: Correspondence between Seth Youngs Wells of Shakers, N.Y. and Prof Benjamin Silliman of Yale College, New Haven, ed. by A.G.H. (caption title, n.p., n.d.), containing letters dated 1823, but published (as internal evidence proves) subsequent to 1847.

TRANSMITTING COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION

43

offered, to any one that will come and live upon it, a few absurd peculiarities and positive requisitions will keep every body aloof, considers little the magnetic nature of meat and drink." 15 Once initiated in the early 1820's, serious discussion of the Shakers continued unabated. Niles' Register and Blackwood's Magazine, as well as the North American, carried articles in 1822 and I823. 16 Before the end of the decade local historians were beginning to record the development of the Shakers.17 Belletristic writers, too, became increasingly interested. As early as 1824 Catharine Maria Sedgwick introduced a description of the Shakers at Hancock, Massachusetts, into her novel Redwood. Four years later, in 1828, Emerson visited the Shaker village of Canterbury, New Hampshire, and meditated on an ideal "protestant monastery." In the same year James Fenimore Cooper described the sect. In the 1830's Nathaniel Hawthorne found in Shaker life the material for two of his tales, and Horace Greeley wrote on the subject for the Knickerbocker. In 1843, when communitarianism was again at flood tide, the Transcendentalist Dial published "A Day with the Shakers." 18 During the second quarter of the nineteenth century the Shakers were also becoming one of the sights to be seen by foreign travelers in the United States. Even before Silliman and Dwight published is Edward Everett, " T h e Shakers," North American Review, XVI, 76-102 (Jan. 1823); the quotation is from p. 98. is Jonathan Leslie, " T h e Shakers," Niles' Weekly Register, XXIII, 37-39 (Sept. 21, 1822); Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, XIII, 463-69 (April 1823). 1 7 See, for example, [David D. Field], History of the County of Berkshire, Massachusetts (Pittsfield, 1829), pp. 285-86, 419-21; J o h n W. Barber, Historical Collections . . . Relating to . . . Massachusetts (Worcester, 1841), pp. 73-74, 423-24 (first published 1839); idem, Historical Collections of the State of New York (New York, 1841), pp. 54-55, 120-22; Henry Howe, Historical Collections of Ohio (Cincinnati, 1847), p p . 501-2. See also such religious histories as J o h n Hayward, The Book of Religions (Boston, 1842), pp. 75-85; and I. Daniel R u p p , HE PAHA EKKLESIA: An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States (Philadelphia, 1844), pp. 656-62. is [Catharine M. Sedgwick], Redwood: A Tale (author's revised ed., New York, 1850), pp. x, xiii-xv, 256-60 (first published 1824); R. W. Emerson, Letters, ed. by R. L. Rusk (6 vols., New York, 1939), I, 225-26; [James Fenimore Cooper], Notions of the Americans, Picked up by a Travelling Bachelor (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1833), II, 247-50 (first published 1828); Nathaniel Hawthorne, " T h e Canterbury Pilgrims," in The Token and Atlantic Souvenir, 1833, pp. 153-66; and " T h e Shaker Bridal," ibid., 1838, pp. 117-25; Horace Greeley, "A Sabbath with the Shakers," Knickerbocker, or New-York Monthly Magazine, XI, 532-37 (June 1838); [Charles Lane], "A Day with the Shakers," Dial, IV, 165-73 (Oct. 1843). This literary interest continued. See [Walt Whitman], " T h e Shakers," Harper's New Monthly Magazine, XV, 164-77 (July 1857), the authorship of which has been established by Charles I. Glicksberg, "A W h i t m a n Discovery," Colophon, n.s., I, 227-33 (Oct. 1935); a n d William Dean Howells, "A Shaker Village," Atlantic Monthly, XXXVII, 699-710 (June 1876).

44

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

their descriptions, authors of travel books had made mention of the Shakers. B u t the earliest travelers, like Charles W i l l i a m J a n s o n who toured the country from 1793 to 1806, noted only the extraordinary form of worship that had given the sect its name. Even as late as 1816 a traveler in the western country, David T h o m a s , could describe a Shaker village without mentioning its communistic arrangements. 1 9 After 1820, however, there was a decided change. B e g i n n i n g with Silliman and Dwight, virtually every traveler dealt with the communitarian institutions of the Shakers as well as their theology. Many, in fact, showed n o interest in the latter, subscribing to the view of Harriet M a r t i n e a u : " T h e moral and economical principles of these societies ought to be most carefully distinguished by the observer. T h i s being done, I believe it will be found that whatever they have peculiarly good among them is owing to the soundness of their economical principles; whatever they have that excites compassion, is owing to the badness of their moral arrangements." 20 Discerning travelers perceived a unity behind the apparent diversity of these communities of English-speaking Shakers and Germanspeaking R a p p i t e s and Zoarites and others. T h e y recognized that a single point of view animated them all, and they sought to understand and define this communitarian point of view through deliberate comparison and analysis. As early as 1826 the Duke of Saxe-WeimarEisenach undertook to compare Father R a p p ' s community at Economy with R o b e r t Owen's at New Harmony. Captain and Mrs. Basil H a l l visited b o t h Shakers and R a p p i t e s in the years 1827 and 1828 and gossiped about Owen's experiment. T i m o t h y F l i n t mentioned the Shakers near Vincennes and both the R a p p i t e s and the Owenites at New H a r m o n y in his description of I n d i a n a in 1828. Between 1828 and 1830, J a m e s Stuart visited the Shakers and the village of if Charles William Janson, The Stranger in America, 1793-1806, ed. by Carl S. Driver (New York, 1935), pp. 103^1; David Thomas, Travels through the Western Country in the Summer of 1816 (Auburn, N.Y., 1819), pp. 149-52. In 1795, it is true, the Duke of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt was interested in the economic arrangements of the Shakers but could obtain little information. See his Travels, I, 389-94. 2« Martineau, Society in America, II, 55. Fifteen descriptions of the Shakers by British travelers before 1835, and four more in the succeeding quarter-century, are listed, respectively, by Jane L. Mesick, The English Traveller in America, 1785-1835 (Columbia University, Studies in English and Comparative Literature; New York, 1922), p. 267, n. 48; and Max Berger, The British Traveller in America, 1836-1860 (Columbia University, Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, no. 502; New York, 1943), pp. 139-40, nn. 41, 42. Additional references are in: James Flint, Letters from America (1822), in Thwaites, ed., Early Western Travels, IX, 299-300; George Combe, Notes on the United States of North America, during a Phrenological Visit in 1838-9-40 (3 vols., Edinburgh, 1841), II, 301-6; James F. W. Johnston, Notes on North America, Agricultural, Economical, and Social (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1851), II, 264-69.

TRANSMITTING COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION

45

New Harmony, learning all he could about Owen's recent community at the latter place. T h e scientific interests of Prince ¡Maximilian of Wied-Neuwied brought him to New Harmony in the winter of 1832-33, and what he learned of the experiment that had been attempted there prepared him for a subsequent visit to the community at Zoar, Ohio. A Hungarian traveler, Sândor Farkas, visited both the Rappites at Economy and the Shakers at New Lebanon in 1834, and he discussed Robert Owen's experiment at New Harmony. During the years 1834-36 Harriet Martineau studied the Shakers and the Harmonists at Economy, in the most serious attempt yet made to understand the working of communitarian principles. James Silk Buckingham visited an even greater variety of communities between 1837 and 1841, including Economy and Zoar, as well as Shaker villages in New Hampshire, New York, and Ohio. 2 1 At last there appeared, in the 1840's, travelers whose main purpose was to study and compare the experimental communities of various types that were to be found in the United States. T h e i r efforts reflected, of course, the growing interest in socialism that preceded the revolutions of 1848, an interest that produced, in 1841, the first comprehensive historical survey of social experiments, Mary HenWhich nell's Outline of the Various Social Systems ir Communities Have Been Founded on the Principle of Co-operation.-2 Miss Hen2 1 Karl Bernhard, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, Travels (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1828), II, 106-23, 159-66; Basil Hall, Travels in North America, in the Years 1827 and 1828 (3d ed., 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1830), I, 111-12; The Aristocratic Journey, Being the Outspoken Letters of Mrs. Basil Hall, ed. by Una Pope-Hennessy (New York, 1931), pp. 40-44, 79, 253, 288; Timothy Flint, A Condensed Geography and History of the Western States, or the Mississippi Valley (2 vols., Cincinnati, 1828), II, 152-56, see also p. 317; James Stuart, Three Years in North America (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1833), I, 281-89; II, 403-20; Maximilian, Prince of Wied, Travels in the Interior of North America (1843), in Thwaites, ed., Early Western Travels, XXII, 163-97; XXIV, 154-56; Sàndor Farkas, Ütazds Észak Amèrikàban [Travel in North America] (Kolozsvâr [Klausenburg], 1834), pp. 231-44, and chap. VI (reference supplied through the kindness of Dr. Henry Miller Madden); Martineau, Society in America, II, 54-65; James S. Buckingham, America, Historical, Statistic, and Descriptive (3 vols., London [1841]), II, 352-405; III, 219-20; idem, The Eastern and Western States of America (3 vols., London [1842]), II, 205-36, 292-93, 421-30.

22 Originally published anonymously as an appendix to Charles Bray, The Philosophy of Necessity; or, the Law of Consequences, As Applicable to Mental, Moral, and Social Science (2 vols., London, 1841), II, 493-663; then republished as a separate volume (London, 1844), the author's name being given only in a note on p. iii. Four contemporary works published on the Continent ranged over the various types of socialist thought, but they were narrower in historical scope: [Jérôme] Adolphe Blanqui, Histoire de l'économie politique en Europe (2 vols., Paris, 1837); Louis Reybaud, Études sur les réformateurs contemporains ou socialistes modernes (Paris, 1840), originally published in 1837 in the Revue des deux mondes; Lorenz von Stein, Der Socialismus und Communismus des heutigen

46

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

nell's study, written in England, drew upon literary sources, not personal observation. T h e need for the latter was apparent to other leaders in the movement. In 1843, accordingly, J o h n Finch, president of the Rational Society, the central Owenite organization in Great Britain, resigned his post in order to tour the United States. He visited many of the existing sectarian communities, a number of Fourierist phalanxes, certain independent enterprises, and, naturally enough, the site of Owen's experiment at New Harmony. Upon his return to England he published in the Owenite New Moral World, two series of "Notes on Travel in the United States," the first of which, comprising twenty-two letters, dealt with the communitive colonies he had visited. 23 Though never republished in book form, it deserves to rank as the first comprehensive work on the American communities. When Finch came to America, an even more elaborate project than his was under way to gather for publication the original sources bearing upon all the American communities, existing and defunct. T h e projector of this work was A. J . Macdonald, a printer by trade, who had been interested in Owenism in Scotland, and who migrated to the United States about 1842. He spent some time at New Harmony in that year gathering reminiscences of the earlier experiment; he lived for four months among the Shakers at Watervliet, Ohio, in 1842-43; he attended Owen's lectures in New York in 1845; and before long he was making regular pilgrimages to existing communities to observe and inquire. He had originally planned a volume to be entitled Travels in Search of Employment, but his purpose gradually altered and with it his title, until in 1851 he printed a circular letter announcing a projected book on The Communities of the United States, which he hoped might "serve as a guide to all future experimenters," and for which he solicited information and documents from surviving participants in earlier communitive ventures. There was a gratifying response, and Macdonald was on the point of digesting his material into chapters when the cholera struck him down in New York, about the year 1854. 24 It remained for a later Frankreichs (Leipzig, 1842); and Theodor Oelckers, Die Bewegung des Socialismus und Communismus (Leipzig, 1844). 23 New Moral World, XII, 232, to X I I I , 10-11 (22 installments, Jan. 13-July 6, 1844). T h e section on the Shakers was reprinted in Working Man's Advocate (New York), April 27, 1844, p. 3. 24 T h e manuscripts and collections of A. J . Macdonald are preserved in the Yale University Library, where they were deposited by John Humphrey Noyes, who recovered them about 1865 and used them extensively in his own History of American Socialisms (1870). T h e circular letter is in the collection, and is reprinted by Noy.es, who also gives a brief description of Macdonald. Some autobiographical information is furnished by the A. J. Macdonald MSS themselves.

TRANSMITTING COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION

47

generation to realize his plan for a comparative study of American communities based on first-hand observation. T h r e e such volumes appeared at last between 1870 and 1878. 2 5 As an investigator Macdonald exceeded his contemporaries in thoroughness, b u t he did not differ from them in the conception underlying his study. T h a t the experimental communities were manifestations of a single movement was the unchallenged assumption of practically every observer in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Indeed, though the founders of communities might differ from one another in their plans, they thought of themselves as participants in a well-understood and unified tradition. T h i s they revealed by frequent references to their communitive predecessors. T h e interrelations among seventeenth- and eighteenth-century G e r m a n sectarians have already been examined. As the communitarian movement gathered m o m e n t u m in the nineteenth century, intervisitation occurred on an even wider scale, and published crossreferences became more frequent. I n 1818, six years before he came to the U n i t e d States, R o b e r t Owen printed in pamphlet form a communication concerning the Shakers, 2 6 and a week after he landed in America he inspected the Shaker village at Niskeyuna, New York. T h i s first-hand view of the Shakers, wrote his son, " m a d e us all in love with a c o m m u n i t y . " 27 T h e interest was by no means on one side only. T h e Shakers already knew of Owen's experiments at New L a n a r k , 2 8 and several members from societies in I n d i a n a and Kentucky visited h i m at H a r m o n i e after his arrival. 2 9 Other previous As befitted one whom Noyes dubbed "the 'Old Mortality' of Socialism," Macdonald published a pamphlet entitled Monuments, Grave Stones, Burying Grounds, Cemeteries, Temples (Albany, 1848). At the opposite end of the sentimental scale, he edited a gift annual, The Rainbow, 1847 (Albany, 1847). 2 5 Noyes, History of American Socialisms (1870); Charles Nordhoff, The Communistic Societies of the United States; from Personal Visit and Observation (New York, 1875); and William A. Hinds, American Communities: Brief Sketches of Economy, Zoar, Bethel, Aurora, Amana, Icaria, the Shakers, Oneida, Wallingford, and the Brotherhood of the New Life (Oneida, N.Y., 1878). On these and subsequent publications see the first section of the Bibliographical Essay. m\V. S. Warder, "A Brief Sketch of the Religious Society of People Called Shakers," dated 1817, in Owen, New View of Society: Tracts (1818), reprinted in Life, I.A, 143-54. " William Owen, Diary . . . from November 10, 1824, to April 20 [actually 19], 1825, ed. by Joel W. Hiatt (Indiana Historical Society Publications, vol. IV, no. 1; Indianapolis, 1906), p. 13; entry for Nov. 11, 1824. 2 8 Donald Macdonald, Diaries, . . . 1824-1826, with an introduction by Caroline Dale Snedeker (Indiana Historical Society Publications, vol. XIV, no. 2; Indianapolis, 1942), p. 199; entry for Nov. 17, 1824. Ibid., pp. 273-75, 290. See also Caroline Creese Pelham, ed., "Letters of William Pelham, Written in 1825 and 1826," in Harlow Lindley, ed., Indiana As Seen by Early Travelers (Indiana Historical Collections [III]; Indianapolis, 1916),

48

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

experiments were called to Owen's attention during his American travels, 30 and even the distant past of communitarianism was summoned up for him. An old disciple of Pantisocracy, for example, was stirred by the reports coming from New Harmony and published in the Owenite journal in London a sonnet he had composed in 1794 in honor of the earlier project. 3 1 In New York, moreover, Owen was given a first-hand account of the Jesuit reducciones in Paraguay by a South American general who knew them in boyhood. 32 T h e most important and obvious connection between Owen and the American communitive past was furnished by the Rappites, whose colony at Harmonie, Indiana, he purchased outright as the laboratory for his own experiment. T h i s was something more than an ordinary transfer of property. Owen had known of the Rappites for a decade at least, and in 1820 he had sent Father Rapp a set of his own publications, together with a request for full particulars on the latter's "two experiments" in Pennsylvania and Indiana. 3 3 Nor was Owen the only one to see a connection between his plan and the Rappites' practice. An Englishman named William Hebert visited Harmonie in 1822, and in 1825 he published the description he had written at the time, appending to it an expression of confidence that "an agricultural and manufacturing community," based "upon the plan of that benefactor of his race, Mr. Robert Owen, and somewhat similar to those of the Friends [i.e., the Shakers] and Harmonians," could not fail of success. "With the societies of the Harmonians and Friends of America before our eyes," he asked, "who can doubt it?" 3 4 p. 397. This correspondence will be cited hereafter as "Pelham Letters," page references being to Lindley's volume. so See W. Owen, Diary, pp. 62, 91; D. Macdonald, Diaries, p. 233. He visited Zoar in the summer of 1828. See Robert Owen to James M. Dorsey, Wheeling, July 14, 1828, MS in Indiana Historical Society. In 1841 Owen included descriptions of the Shakers, Rappites, and Zoarites in his Home Colonies (2d ed., 1841), pp. 153-59. Co-operative Magazine and Monthly Herald, I, 133 (April 1826); reprinted in New-Harmony Gazette, II, 120 (Jan. 10, 1827). 32 D. Macdonald, Diaries, pp. 199-200; W. Owen, Diary, pp. 25-26. 33 Owen to George Rapp, New Lanark, Aug. 4, 1820, MS in Chicago Historical Society, printed with minor verbal inaccuracies in George Flower, History of the English Settlement in Edwards County, Illinois, Founded in 1817 and 1818, by Morris Birkbeck and George Flower, ed. by E. B. Washburne (Chicago Historical Society, Collection, I; Chicago, 1882), pp. 372-73. In this letter Owen says he learned of the Rappites from John Melish, Travels in the United States of America, in the Years 1806 t- 1807, and 1809, 1810, ir 1811 (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1812), II, 64-83. He probably read the extract from Melish in The Philanthropist, V (1815), 277-88; see below, p. 143, n. 37. 34 William Hebert, A Visit to the Colony of Harmony, in Indiana (London, 1825), as reprinted in Lindley, ed„ Indiana As Seen by Early Travelers, pp. 339-40.

TRANSMITTING COMMUNITARIAN TRADITION

49

Hebert wrote his description at the village of Albion, Illinois, in the midst of the English Settlement that Morris Birkbeck and George Flower had established in 1817-18 in Edwards County, a score of miles north of Harmonie, across the Wabash. This was a simple colony of immigrants, not an experiment in communitarianism, yet it provided important links between the Rappites and the Owenites, 35 and from its contacts with the two experiments it developed certain communitive tendencies of its own, which reveal how captivating the latter doctrine was in the 1820's. T h e slavery issue was what first aroused the reforming zeal of the English settlers, and Rappite influences entered their thinking about the problem. As early as 1819 George Flower was turning over in his mind the idea of adapting "the Harmony plan" to Negro emancipation. Eventually, as we shall see, it was the New Harmony plan that he actually applied thereto, in collaboration with Frances Wright at Nashoba, Tennessee. In the meantime, communitarianism cropped up in other ways at Albion, for when Owen visited there in December 1824 several residents "seemed already to have commenced the community system." Owen's lectures drew some of the English settlers to New Harmony, and inspired an Owenite project on the English Prairie itself. 36 T h e sense of common aims and values that was apparent during 85 It was Richard Flower, father of George, who negotiated the sale of Harmonic to Owen. Moreover, the travelers who visited the English Settlement usually described the Rappites as well, thus advertising their principles in England. See the travel books of T h o m a s H u l m e (1819), Richard Flower (1819), J o h n Woods .(1820-21), William Faux (1818-19), and Adlard Welby (1819-20), as reprinted in Thwaites, ed.. Early Western Travels, X, 53-61, 98-100, 312-16; XI, 248-51; XII. 260-67, respectively. See also Mesick, English Traveller in America, 17H5-1S35, pp. 294-97; and J a n e Rodman, " T h e English Settlement in Southern Illinois as Viewed by English Travelers, 1815-1825," Indiana Magazine of History, XLIV, 37-68 (March 1948). T h e English settlers received inquiries from philanthropists elsewhere, many of whom were suspicious of R a p p . In 1817 a Quaker reported from Philadelphia that the German leader had "become the purchaser of a n u m b e r of Redemptioners who are worn o u t with their confinement on board ship, and subscribe to his terms for the sake of release." T h e motive for writing was "an apprehension of the influence h e may gain over a deluded people." Jeremiah Warder, Jr., to George Flower, T h e Hills [Philadelphia], 8th Month 28th, 1817, MS in Chicago Historical Society. 38 W. Owen, Diary, pp. 79, 88-89, 91; New-Harmony Gazette, I, 268-69 (May 17, 1826). William Hall, who migrated to Wanborough in the English Settlement in 1821, was a fellow passenger and later a correspondent of Hebert's; he frequently visited the Rappites, attended Owen's lectures at Albion and at New Harmony, and was eventually secretary and treasurer of the Owenite society at Wanborough. "From England to Illinois in 1821: T h e J o u r n a l of William Hall," ed. by Jay Monaghan, Illinois State Historical Society, Journal, X X X I X , 35, 45-47, 51-57, 211, 215, 217, 221, 235, 238-45 (March, J u n e 1946); cited hereafter as William Hall, "Journal." See also George Flower, History of the English Settlement, pp. 149-52, 282-83, and the more detailed accounts below, pp. 176, 214, 219-21.

50

BACKWOODS UTOPIAS

the Owenite excitement of the 1820's became even more pronounced during the 1840's. Communitarians of all persuasions evinced an intense curiosity about one another's affairs. A Shaker sister who had lived at M o u n t L e b a n o n since 1826 compiled a "Sketch of Socialistic E x p e r i m e n t s " covering the period—evidence in itself of Shaker interest. I n it, moreover, she mentioned the visits and letters received by the Shakers from the leaders of other contemporary experiments—specifically W i l l i a m I I . Fish of the Hopedale Community, Charles Sears of the N o r t h American Phalanx, Marcus Spring of the R a r i t a n Bay U n i o n , J o h n A. Collins of the Skaneateles Community, J o h n Orvis of B r o o k Farm, and Alcander Longley, sponsor of a sequence of communities in the vicinity of St. Louis. 3 7 T o the G e r m a n sects, as to the Shakers, the founders of new communities turned for advice and assistance. T h e archives of the H a r m o n y Society, reports a recent investigator, "provide ample unpublished evidence" that English-speaking communitarians "communicated with the Harmonists before their own groups were formed." 3 8 Financial aid was sometimes forthcoming, as when the Harmonites lent money during the 1870's to the Hutterians in South Dakota, and offered them lands in Pennsylvania. 3 9 Concerted action was occasionally taken by c o m m u n i t a r i a n sects of different persuasions, notably by the Zoar and Harmony communities in the handling of applications for membership, and by the Bishop Hill, Oneida, and R a p p i t e communities for more general purposes.' 10 At one time in the 1850's an actual merger of Economy, Zoar, and the Shakers was contemplated. 4 1 3' Jane D. Knight, "Sketch of Socialistic Experiments," MS in Library of Congress, Papers of Shakers, no. 243, box 47. The catalogue describes this ten-page MS as having been written at Union Village, Ohio, in 1856, but date and provenience are manifestly in error, for events as late as 1872 are mentioned in the document and Sister Jane herself was a member of the Mount Lebanon community. See her Brief Narrative of Events Touching Various Reforms (Albany, 1880), an autobiographical narrative dealing principally with her conversion to Shakerism. as Karl J. Arndt, " T h e Harmonists and the Mormons," American-German Review, vol. X, no. 5, p. 6 (June 1944). As the title of this article suggests, some influence was probably exerted by the Rappites upon the collectivistic institutions of the Mormons. The Owenite colony of Equality in Wisconsin borrowed details of its constitution not only from the Fourierist Wisconsin Phalanx, but also from the Separatists of Zoar. See Herald of Progress (London), p. 65 (Feb. 14, 1846). Arndt, " T h e Harmonists and the Hutterians," American-German Review, vol. X, no. 6, pp. 24-27 (Aug. 1944).